RESUMO

Objective: The main objective of this study is to report on the implementation and results of the "Supporting Health-Related Judicial Decisions in Brazil" project conducted at the Health Technology Assessment Center, Hospital Sírio-Libanês through the "Programa de Apoio ao Desenvolvimento Institucional do Sistema Único de Saúde", in Brazil. Methods: This study is an experience report of a project conducted at the Health Technology Assessment Center, Hospital Sírio-Libanês. Results: The activities of the project occurred in 2023 and included two online training courses on primary studies and systematic reviews, 11 one-day workshops with technical-scientific content for members of the Technical Support Centers for the Judiciary (NATJus), 40 online technical-scientific consultations for magistrates on a digital platform, 11 technical-scientific reports addressing the most legally claimed technologies in Brazil; two methodological tools, a national forum (hybrid event), 10 chat-based mentorships for NATJus members; and the maintenance of an open-access blog, by publishing news on relevant topics on law and health. Discussion and conclusion: This project has contributed to the improvement of the judicial decision-making process by providing a range of activities aimed at aiding the prioritization of health technologies that are clearly effective and safe over those that are ineffective, harmful, or have uncertain effects.

Objetivo: O objetivo principal deste estudo é relatar a implementação e os resultados do projeto "Apoio técnico-científico à tomada de decisão judicial em Saúde no Brasil" realizado no Hospital Sírio-Libanês por meio do "Programa de Apoio ao Desenvolvimento Institucional do Sistema Único de Saúde". Métodos: Este estudo é um relato de experiência de um projeto realizado no Núcleo de Avaliação de Tecnologias em Saúde do Hospital Sírio-Libanês. Resultados: As atividades do projeto ocorreram em 2023 e incluíram dois cursos de formação online sobre estudos primários e revisões sistemáticas, 11 oficinas de um dia com conteúdo técnico-científico para membros dos Núcleos de Apoio Técnico ao Judiciário (NATJus), 40 consultas on-line técnico-científicas para magistrados em plataforma digital, 11 relatórios técnico-científicos abordando as tecnologias mais reivindicadas judicialmente no Brasil; duas ferramentas metodológicas, um fórum nacional (evento híbrido), 10 mentorias via chat para membros do NATJus; e a manutenção de um blog de acesso aberto, com publicação de notícias sobre temas relevantes de direito e saúde. Discussão e conclusão: Este projeto contribuiu para a melhoria do processo de tomada de decisão judicial, fornecendo uma série de atividades destinadas a ajudar na priorização de tecnologias de saúde que sejam claramente eficazes e seguras em detrimento daquelas que são ineficazes, prejudiciais ou têm efeitos incertos.

Objetivo: El objetivo principal de este estudio es informar sobre la implementación y los resultados del proyecto "Apoyo a las Decisiones Judiciales Relacionadas con la Salud en Brasil" realizado en el Centro de Tecnología en Salud del Hospital Sírio-Libanês a través del "Programa de Apoio ao Desenvolvimento Institucional do Sistema Único de Saúde", en Brasil. Métodos: Este estudio es un informe de experiencia de un proyecto realizado en el Centro de Tecnología en Salud del Hospital Sírio-Libanês. Resultados: Las actividades del proyecto ocurrieron en 2023 e incluyeron dos cursos de capacitación en línea sobre estudios primarios y revisiones sistemáticas, 11 talleres de un día de contenido técnico-científico para miembros de los Centros de Apoyo Técnico al Poder Judicial (NATJus), 40 consultas técnico-científicas en línea para magistrados en plataforma digital, 11 informes técnico-científicos que abordan las tecnologías más reclamadas legalmente en Brasil; dos herramientas metodológicas, un foro nacional (evento híbrido), 10 mentorías basadas en chat para miembros de NATJus; y el mantenimiento de un blog de acceso abierto, mediante la publicación de noticias sobre temas relevantes en derecho y salud. Discusión y conclusión: Este proyecto ha contribuido a mejorar el proceso de toma de decisiones judiciales proporcionando actividades para priorizar las tecnologías sanitarias claramente eficaces y seguras frente a aquellas que son ineficaces, nocivas o de efectos inciertos.

Assuntos

RESUMO

La mayoría de las preguntas de investigación (PI), conducirán a un proyecto que apunta a generar nuevo conocimiento, sin embargo el escenario, la población a estudio y la metodología pueden ser muy diferentes, lo que determinará que los resultados obtenidos y por ende, el nivel de evidencia (NE) y el grado de recomendación (GR) puedan variar notablemente. El objetivo de este artículo fue proporcionar recomendaciones para formular una PI asociada al NE y respectivos GR que se pueden desprender a partir de los resultados generados. Este artículo entregará algunos conocimientos sobre la PI y su relación con los NE y GR de la evidencia generada a partir de resultados obtenidos por un proceso de investigación en diferentes escenarios de investigación.

SUMMARY: Most research questions (RQ) will lead to a project that aims to generate new knowledge. However, the setting, study population and methodology may be very different, which will determine the results obtained and therefore, the level of evidence (LOE) and the grade of recommendation (GOR) may vary significantly. The aim of this study was to provide recommendations to formulate a RQ associated with the LOE and respective GOR that can be derived from the generated results. This article will provide some knowledge about the RQ and its relationship with the LEO and GOR of the generated evidence from results obtained by a research process in different research scenarios.

Assuntos

RESUMO

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach is a systematic method for assessing the certainty of evidence (CoE) and strength of recommendations in health care. We aimed to verify the effects of an online-based GRADE course on multirater consistency in the evaluation of the CoE in systematic reviews (SRs) analysis. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTINGS: Sixty-five Brazilian methodologists and researchers participated in an online course over 8 weeks. Asynchronous lessons and weekly synchronous meetings addressed the GRADE system in the context of CoE assessment. We asked participants to evaluate the CoE of random SRs (two before and another two after the course). Analyzes focused on the multirater agreement with a standard response, in the interrater agreement, and before-after changes in the proportion of participants that rated down the domains. RESULTS: 48 individuals completed the course. Participants presented improvements in the raters' assessment of the CoE using the GRADE approach after the course. The multirater consistency of indirectness, imprecision, and the overall CoE increased after the course, as well as the agreement between raters and the standard response. Furthermore, interrater reliability increased for risk of bias, inconsistency, indirectness, publication bias, and overall CoE, indicating progress in between-raters consistency. After the course, approximately 78% of individuals rated down the overall CoE to a low/very low degree, and participants presented more explanations for the judgment of each domain. CONCLUSION: An online GRADE course improved the consistency and agreement of the CoE assessment by Brazilian researchers. Online training courses have the potential to improve skills in guideline methodology development.

Assuntos

RESUMO

Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of nonpharmacological topical interventions for treating breastfeeding nipple pain. Methods: Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) assessing lactating women suffering from breastfeeding painful nipples were included. Primary outcomes were pain, healing process, and adverse events. A comprehensive search was conducted on June 02, 2023, without date or language restrictions. Methodological quality was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool and the certainty of the evidence, the GRADE approach. Results: Nineteen RCTs with unclear to high risk of bias were included. There was uncertain evidence regarding the effects of photobiomodulation versus placebo on pain reduction (mean difference [MD] -0.15; 95% confidence interval [95% CI] -1 0.49 to 1.19; 139 participants, 2 RCTs). There are uncertainties concerning the effects of lanolin versus breast milk on pain (MD -1.80; 95% CI -2.43 to -1.17; 1 RCT; 180 participants), wound healing (MD 0.10; 95% CI -0.26 to -0.46; 1 RCT; 180 participants), and any adverse events (zero events in both groups). Similar effects were observed by the other interventions assessed. Conclusion: The evidence of nonpharmacological topical interventions for painful nipples is imprecise, and future RCTs with higher methodological quality are needed to support recommendations. Considering the accessibility and low cost of these alternative treatments, the findings of this evidence synthesis could support clinical decision-making and guide future research. PROSPERO CRD42020170320.

Assuntos

RESUMO

La investigación en salud es la base del conocimiento médico y de las recomendaciones en los sistemas de salud. Por ello, la elección de desenlaces apropiados en estudios de intervenciones terapéuticas es un paso fundamental en la producción de evidencia y, posteriormente, para la toma de decisiones. En este artículo proponemos tres factores clave para la elección de desenlaces: la inclusión de desenlaces reportados por pacientes, ya que ponen el foco del efecto de la intervención en la percepción que tienen los propios pacientes de su estado de salud y calidad de vida; la consideración de desenlaces clínicamente relevantes, los cuales son mediciones directas del estado de salud del paciente y, por ende serán determinantes en la toma de decisiones; y la utilización de herramienta que estandariza y permite la homogeneización en la medición e interpretación de desenlaces, facilitando la producción y posterior síntesis de evidencia apropiada para el ecosistema de evidencia. La correcta elección de los desenlaces permitirá que la evidencia generada de estos estudios ayude a los tomadores de decisiones en salud y los profesionales clínicos a entregar cuidados apropiados centrados en el paciente y a optimizar el uso de recursos en salud e investigación clínica.

Health research is the foundation of medical knowledge and healthcare system recommendations. Therefore, choosing appropriate outcomes in studies of therapeutic interventions is a fundamental step in producing evidence and, subsequently, for decision-making. In this article, we propose three key factors for the choice of outcomes: the inclusion of patient-reported outcomes, since they focus on the patient's perception of their health status and quality of life; the consideration of clinically relevant outcomes, which are direct measurements of the patient's health status and, therefore, will be decisive in decision-making; and the use of core outcome sets, a tool that standardizes the measurement and interpretation of outcomes, facilitating the production and synthesis of appropriate evidence for the evidence ecosystem. The correct choice of outcomes will help health decision-makers and clinicians deliver appropriate patient-centered care and optimize the use of resources in healthcare and clinical research.

RESUMO

Health research is the foundation of medical knowledge and healthcare system recommendations. Therefore, choosing appropriate outcomes in studies of therapeutic interventions is a fundamental step in producing evidence and, subsequently, for decision-making. In this article, we propose three key factors for the choice of outcomes: the inclusion of patient-reported outcomes, since they focus on the patient's perception of their health status and quality of life; the consideration of clinically relevant outcomes, which are direct measurements of the patient's health status and, therefore, will be decisive in decision-making; and the use of core outcome sets, a tool that standardizes the measurement and interpretation of outcomes, facilitating the production and synthesis of appropriate evidence for the evidence ecosystem. The correct choice of outcomes will help health decision-makers and clinicians deliver appropriate patient-centered care and optimize the use of resources in healthcare and clinical research.

La investigación en salud es la base del conocimiento médico y de las recomendaciones en los sistemas de salud. Por ello, la elección de desenlaces apropiados en estudios de intervenciones terapéuticas es un paso fundamental en la producción de evidencia y, posteriormente, para la toma de decisiones. En este artículo proponemos tres factores clave para la elección de desenlaces: la inclusión de desenlaces reportados por pacientes, ya que ponen el foco del efecto de la intervención en la percepción que tienen los propios pacientes de su estado de salud y calidad de vida; la consideración de desenlaces clínicamente relevantes, los cuales son mediciones directas del estado de salud del paciente y, por ende serán determinantes en la toma de decisiones; y la utilización de herramienta que estandariza y permite la homogeneización en la medición e interpretación de desenlaces, facilitando la producción y posterior síntesis de evidencia apropiada para el ecosistema de evidencia. La correcta elección de los desenlaces permitirá que la evidencia generada de estos estudios ayude a los tomadores de decisiones en salud y los profesionales clínicos a entregar cuidados apropiados centrados en el paciente y a optimizar el uso de recursos en salud e investigación clínica.

Assuntos

Assuntos

RESUMO

Patient Blood Management (PBM) is a multidimensional approach that seeks to optimize the use of blood and its components in patients. This matter emerged as a response to the need to reduce unnecessary exposure to blood transfusions and their potential risks. In the past, blood transfusion was often overused resulting in complications and high costs. The advent of Patient Blood Management has caused a paradigm shift, highlighting anemia prevention, bleeding control and maximizing the production of blood cells by the organism itself. Patient Blood Management guidelines include the early identification of anemia, strategies to minimize blood loss during surgery, intraoperative blood conservation techniques, preoperative hemoglobin optimization and evidence-based approaches to the rational use of blood transfusions. Aiming to improve clinical outcomes, decrease transfusion-related complications and reduce associated costs, this multidisciplinary approach counts on doctors, nurses, pharmacists and other healthcare professionals. Based on research and clinical evidence, Patient Blood Management continues to evolve thereby promoting safer, more effective patient-centered practices. Its implementation has proven beneficial in various medical contexts thereby contributing to improvements in the quality of care provided to patients. Our goal with this Consensus is to present readers with a broad and diverse view of Patient Blood Management so that they have the building blocks to implement this new technique.

RESUMO

The use of strategies to reduce blood loss and transfusions is essential in the treatment of surgical patients, including in complex cardiac surgeries and those that use cardiopulmonary bypass. Antifibrinolytics, such as epsilon-aminocaproic acid (EACA) and tranexamic acid (TXA), are widely used in these procedures, as well as in other types of surgeries. These medicines are included in the World Health Organization (WHO) list of 'essential medicines'. Scientific evidence demonstrates the effectiveness of EACA in reducing bleeding and the need for transfusions in heart surgery. EACA is highly recommended for use in heart surgery by the American Society of Anesthesiology Task Force on Perioperative Blood Management. Regarding the safety of EACA, there is no robust evidence of any significant thrombotic potential. TXA has also been shown to be effective in reducing the use of blood transfusions in cardiac and non-cardiac surgeries and is considered safer than other antifibrinolytic agents. There is no evidence of any increased risk of thromboembolic events with TXA, but doses greater than 2 g per day have been associated with an increased risk of seizures. It is also important to adjust the dose in patients with renal impairment. In conclusion, antifibrinolytics, such as EACA and TXA, are effective in reducing blood loss and transfusion use in cardiac and non-cardiac surgeries, without causing serious adverse effects.

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: Clinical trials on tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) treatment have shown an improvement in overall and progression-free survival in patients with advanced differentiated thyroid cancer. However, it is necessary to evaluate these studies to assess methodological biases and inconsistencies that may impact the effects. OBJECTIVE: To map and assess the methodological quality of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) regarding randomization, allocation concealment, blinding, and selective reporting bias. METHODS: RCTs assessing the efficacy and safety of TKI for the treatment of advanced differentiated thyroid cancer were included. The search was performed in the MEDLINE database. The included RCTs were assessed for the adequacy of the methodological steps, as recommended by the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. RESULTS: Nine studies were analyzed, of which 77.7% were classified as low risk of bias regarding selective reporting and 33.3% as high risk of reporting bias. The mean time between protocol registration and study publication was approximately 5.11 years. Moreover, 66.7% were classified as low risk of bias for randomization and allocation concealment, and 33.3% did not specify the randomization process and allocation concealment in a way that would allow the identification of occurrences of bias. Concerning blinding of participants and outcome assessors, 77.8% of the RCTs reported adequate blinding and were classified as having a low risk of bias, 11.1% had a high risk of bias, and 11.1% had insufficient information and were classified as having unclear risk of bias. Regarding the blinding of the outcome assessors, 33.3% did the blinding correctly, 11.1% did not blind, and 55.6% did not provide enough information. CONCLUSION: Overall, the assessed RCTs were predominantly at low risk of bias. The critical evaluation of these studies is essential to have confidence in the treatment estimated effect that will support clinical decision-making and provide information to preclude future clinical study flaws.

Assuntos

Assuntos

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The Spanish Society of Medical Oncology (SEOM) has provided open-access guidelines for cancer since 2014. However, no independent assessment of their quality has been conducted to date. This study aimed to critically evaluate the quality of SEOM guidelines on cancer treatment. METHODS: Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II) and AGREE-REX tool was used to evaluate the qualities of the guidelines. RESULTS: We assessed 33 guidelines, with 84.8% rated as "high quality". The highest median standardized scores (96.3) were observed in the domain "clarity of presentation", whereas "applicability" was distinctively low (31.4), with only one guideline scoring above 60%. SEOM guidelines did not include the views and preferences of the target population, nor did specify updating methods. CONCLUSIONS: Although developed with acceptable methodological rigor, SEOM guidelines could be improved in the future, particularly in terms of clinical applicability and patient perspectives.

Assuntos

Assuntos

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Systematic reviews of Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) are considered high-level evidence to support a decision on therapeutic interventions, and their methodological quality is essential to provide reliable and applicable results. OBJECTIVE: This meta-epidemiological study aimed to map and critically appraise systematic reviews assessing treatments for vesiculobullous skin diseases. METHODS: We conducted a comprehensive search strategy on MEDLINE (via Pubmed) in December 2022 without restrictions to find systematic reviews evaluating pharmacological interventions for vesiculobullous skin diseases. The methodological quality was assessed using the AMSTAR-2 tool, and additional information was extracted. We identified nine systematic reviews published between 2002 and 2021, seven assessing pemphigus. RESULTS: According to the AMSTAR-2 tool, 55.6% were classified as critically low quality, 22.2% as moderate quality, 11.1% as low and 11.1% as high quality. No review assessed the certainty of the evidence (GRADE); 86% of pemphigus reviews had at least two overlapping RCTs. There were some limitations regarding methodological flaws and the AMSTAR-2 tool use CONCLUSIONS: These findings reveal a frail methodological quality of systematic reviews about vesiculobullous diseases treatment that may impact the results. Therefore, methodological rigor is mandatory for future systematic reviews to avoid duplication of effort and increase the certainty of the evidence supporting decision-making.

Assuntos

RESUMO

Abstract Background Systematic reviews of Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) are considered high-level evidence to support a decision on therapeutic interventions, and their methodological quality is essential to provide reliable and applicable results. Objective This meta-epidemiological study aimed to map and critically appraise systematic reviews assessing treatments for vesiculobullous skin diseases. Methods We conducted a comprehensive search strategy on MEDLINE (via Pubmed) in December 2022 without restrictions to find systematic reviews evaluating pharmacological interventions for vesiculobullous skin diseases. The methodological quality was assessed using the AMSTAR-2 tool, and additional information was extracted. We identified nine systematic reviews published between 2002 and 2021, seven assessing pemphigus. Results According to the AMSTAR-2 tool, 55.6% were classified as critically low quality, 22.2% as moderate quality, 11.1% as low and 11.1% as high quality. No review assessed the certainty of the evidence (GRADE); 86% of pemphigus reviews had at least two overlapping RCTs. There were some limitations regarding methodological flaws and the AMSTAR-2 tool use Conclusions These findings reveal a frail methodological quality of systematic reviews about vesiculobullous diseases treatment that may impact the results. Therefore, methodological rigor is mandatory for future systematic reviews to avoid duplication of effort and increase the certainty of the evidence supporting decision-making.

RESUMO

Introducción: El desarrollo histórico de la medicina basada en la evidencia está interrelacionado con el desarrollo de la investigación científica y su implementación en la práctica médica. Durante este proceso se validó el método científico y se refuerza la necesidad de controles éticos. Objetivo: Recorrer el desarrollo histórico de la medicina basada en la evidencia y enfatizar en las implicaciones bioéticas para una adecuada implementación en aras de contribuir al perfeccionamiento de las ciencias médicas. Métodos: En la implementación clínica de la medicina basada en la evidencia, el nivel de evidencia científica durante la evaluación de la literatura se jerarquiza, y esto ayuda a los profesionales en la toma de decisiones clínicas. Focalizar la implementación de un medio diagnóstico o una medida terapéutica según la gradualidad y calidad de la evidencia sin más, con una visión que deja fuera los valores morales, el contexto social y la participación del propio paciente, y excluir los distintos obstáculos sociales, culturales y económicos constituye una brecha existente durante la implementación de manera aislada de la medicina basada en la evidencia y es aquí donde la bioética es fundamental, debe conceptualizarse no solo para proteger al paciente sino que debe dar respuesta ante la complejidad tecnológica y científica. Conclusiones: La medicina basada en la evidencia trae consigo una mayor calidad de la práctica clínica y, a la vez, plantea la necesidad de asumir una ética de atención al paciente. Debe ser una práctica que integre lo científico con lo axiológico, conceptualizando en salud una bioética basada en la evidencia.

Introduction: The historical development of evidence-based medicine is interrelated with the development of scientific research and its implementation in medical practice. During this process, the scientific method was validated and the need for ethical controls is reinforced. Objective: To review the historical development of evidence-based medicine and to emphasize on the bioethical implications for an adequate implementation in order to contribute to the improvement of medical sciences. Methods: In the clinical implementation of evidence-based medicine, the level of scientific evidence during the assessment of literature is hierarchized, which helps professionals make clinical decisions. Focusing the implementation of a diagnostic means or a therapeutic measure according to the gradualness and quality of evidence with no more, under a vision rulingout moral values, the social context and the participation of patientsthemselves, as well as excluding the various social, cultural and economic obstacles, represents a gap existing during the isolated implementation of evidence-based medicine. At this point, bioethics is paramount; it must be conceptualized not only to protect the patient, but it must respond in the face of technological and scientific complexity. Conclusions: Evidence-based medicine brings about higher quality of clinical practice and, at the same time, raises the need to assume ethics of patient care. It should be a practice that integrates the scientific with the axiological, conceptualizing evidence-based bioethics in health.

RESUMO

Introducción: A pesar de la importancia de la medicina basada en la evidencia, es necesario una mejor comprensión de la situación para el desarrollo de esfuerzos educativos y prácticos en función de implementar la medicina basada en la evidencia en el sistema de salud. Objetivo: Determinar la actitud, el uso, las barreras y los conocimientos de la medicina basada en la evidencia en los médicos peruanos según el nivel de atención. Métodos: Se realizó un estudio analítico transversal a través de una encuesta que se aplicó a los médicos peruanos que trabajan en diferentes niveles de atención en salud. Resultados: Se encuestó un total de 1396 médicos. El 64,35 % señaló una actitud positiva hacia la aplicación de la medicina basada en la evidencia. En el caso de las barreras, el 51,01 % no tenía suficiente evidencia relevante; el 49,35 % no contaba con tiempo; el 47,20 % no poseía suficientes habilidades para encontrarla; mientras que el 44,40 % no podía hacer lectura crítica de estas. En cuanto a los accesos de información, casi el 80 % de los participantes reportó que no tiene acceso a ninguna base de datos de las mencionadas. Teniendo en cuenta la comprensión de los términos estadísticos, más de dos tercios de los participantes tenían un alto nivel de comprensión. Conclusiones: Aunque la mayoría de los médicos encuestados tienen un buen conocimiento y una actitud positiva hacia la medicina basada en la evidencia, aún existen barreras y uso de la información que se deben mejorar.

Introduction: Despite the importance of evidence-based medicine, a better understanding of the situation is necessary for developing educational and practical efforts to implement evidence-based medicine in the health system. Objective: To determine the attitude, use, barriers and knowledge of evidence-based medicine in Peruvian doctors according to the level of care. Methods: A cross-sectional analytical study was carried out through a survey that was applied to Peruvian doctors who work at different levels of health care. Results: A total of 1396 physicians were surveyed. 64.35% indicated positive attitude towards the application of evidence-based medicine. In the case of barriers, 51.01% did not have enough relevant evidence; 49.35% did not have time; 47.20% did not have sufficient skills to find it; while 44.40% could not critically read them. Regarding information access, almost 80% of the participants reported that they do not have access to any of the aforementioned databases. Taking into account the understanding of statistical terms, more than two-thirds of the participants had high level of understanding. Conclusions: Although the majority of physicians surveyed have good knowledge and positive attitude towards evidence-based medicine, there are still barriers and use of information that need to be improved.

RESUMO

Abstract Background In 2012, the Neurocritical Care Society launched a compilation of protocols regarding the core issues that should be addressed within the first hours of neurological emergencies - the Emergency neurological life support (ENLS). Objective We aim to evaluate this repercussion through a bibliometric analysis. Methods We searched Scopus on October 2022 for articles mentioning ENLS. The following variables were obtained: number of citations; number of citations per year; number of publications per year; year of publication; research type; research subtype; country of corresponding author and its income category and world region; journal of publication and its 5-year impact factor (IF); and section where ENLS appeared. Results After applying eligibility criteria, we retrieved 421 articles, published from 2012 to 2022. The mean number of citations per article was 17.46 (95% Confidence Interval (CI) = 8.20-26.72), while the mean number of citations per year per article was 4.05 (95% CI = 2.50-5.61). The mean destiny journal 5-year IF was 5.141 (95% CI = 4.189-6.093). The majority of articles were secondary research (57.48%; n= 242/421) of which most were narrative reviews (71.90%; n= 174/242). High-Income countries were the most prominent (80.05%; n= 337/421 articles). There were no papers from low-income countries. There were no trials or systematic reviews from middle-income countries. Conclusion Although still low, the number of publications mentioning ENLS is increasing. Articles were mainly published in journals of intensive care medicine, neurology, neurosurgery, and emergency medicine. Most articles were published by authors from high-income countries. The majority of papers were secondary research, with narrative review as the most frequent subtype.

Resumo Antecedentes Em 2012, a Neurocritical Care Society lançou uma compilação de protocolos sobre as questões centrais que devem ser abordadas nas primeiras horas de emergências neurológicas - Emergency neurological life support (ENLS). Objetivo Avaliar a repercussão do ENLS por meio de uma análise bibliométrica. Métodos A base de dados Scopus foi utilizada em outubro de 2022 para a busca por artigos mencionando o ENLS. As seguintes variáveis foram obtidas: número de citações; número de citações por ano; número de publicações por ano; ano de publicação; tipo de pesquisa; país do autor correspondente e sua categoria de renda; revista de publicação e seu fator de impacto de 5 anos (IF); e seção onde o ENLS apareceu. Resultados Os 421 artigos incluídos foram publicados de 2012 a 2022. A média de citações por artigo foi de 17.46 (intervalo de confiança (IC) 95% = 8.20-26.72), enquanto a de citações por ano por artigo foi de 4.05 (IC95% = 2.50-5.61). O IF médio por revista foi de 5.14 (IC95% = 4.19-6.09). A maioria dos artigos era de pesquisa secundária (57.48%; n= 242/421), dos quais a maioria eram revisões narrativas (71.90%; n= 174/242). Os países de alta renda foram os mais prolíficos (80.05%; n= 337/421 artigos). Não houve publicações de países de baixa ou média renda. Conclusão Embora ainda baixo, o número de publicações mencionando o ENLS vem aumentando recentemente. A maioria dos artigos foram publicados em revistas de medicina intensiva, neurologia, neurocirurgia e medicina de emergência. Artigos de pesquisa secundária foram os mais comuns, com revisões narrativas sendo o subtipo mais frequente.