Everyday health

Pregnancies involving maternal post-traumatic stress disorder were associated with higher odds of low birthweight and preterm birth in pooled analyses. However, the review rated the evidence for both outcomes as low quality. These associations do not establish that PTSD caused the outcomes or that treating PTSD would change the likelihood of either outcome.

Keep in mind: The included studies were observational, and the abstract does not describe reference groups or absolute outcome frequencies. The pooled odds ratios therefore cannot tell an individual reader their probability of either birth outcome.

Patients who received music during kidney surgery had lower postoperative pain and anxiety scores than patients in trial control groups. The review detected variation between studies, without reporting its magnitude, and evidence of publication bias for pain. These average symptom scores do not show how many patients experienced a meaningful improvement or how long any improvement lasted.

Keep in mind: The abstract does not describe control conditions or postoperative assessment times. It reports statistically significant heterogeneity without its magnitude, alongside publication bias for pain, limiting interpretation of the pooled results.

For adults living at home with pressure injuries, the review described disrupted activities, pain, poor sleep and emotional strain. People also described coping with loss, managing their health and working with professionals. These themes explain lived experience; they do not show how common each problem is or whether a particular home-care intervention works.

Keep in mind: This abstract-based account cannot show how experiences varied across the included studies. The authors also identify a need for research involving people with cognitive impairment, palliative conditions and those living in rural areas.

Virtual-reality interventions were reported to reduce pain during dialysis-access needle insertion and improve selected physical outcomes and depressive symptoms. These findings concern adults receiving hemodialysis. The abstract does not provide enough detail to determine how large or lasting the changes were, or which comparison conditions underlie the reported improvements.

Keep in mind: The abstract omits effect estimates, confidence intervals and control conditions. The authors call for standardized outcome measurement periods, leaving the timing and durability of reported changes unresolved.

This review asked how neck pain questionnaires are structured and how dependable their measurements are. It reported good reliability and consistency between questions, but variable evidence that the tools captured their intended concepts. Because the questionnaires addressed different concerns, the abstract does not establish a single tool as best for every purpose.

Keep in mind: The abstract provides broad judgments without questionnaire-specific estimates or participant characteristics. This abstract-based summary cannot determine which tool performed best for a particular concern or patient group.

The review estimated that moderate to severe compassion fatigue was common among the nurses studied. Compassion fatigue refers to strain associated with caring for others. Sleep quality, social support, traumatic-event exposure and other factors were identified as related to fatigue, but these surveys cannot determine whether changing those factors would reduce it.

Keep in mind: The abstract does not explain measurement cutoffs, geographic coverage or variation between studies. The pooled estimate should therefore be read as a summary of these surveyed groups, rather than a universal rate for nurses.

Messaging programmes were associated with favourable pooled results for physical activity, sleep and stopping smoking compared with controls. The abstract described no effect on sedentary behaviour or diet, but its statistical details for those outcomes conflict. The evidence therefore needs to be read by individual behaviour rather than treated as proof that messaging improves health habits generally.

Keep in mind: Participant characteristics, programme durations and control conditions are not described. The abstract also leaves the sleep measurement unclear, so its standardized sleep result cannot be translated into a concrete change in sleep.

Patients described smoking as a way to cope with distress, psychiatric symptoms and possible medication side effects. Some reported low self-esteem or limited confidence in quitting as barriers. Patients and professionals valued group sessions and personalized planning to prevent a return to smoking. These interview accounts describe support experiences without establishing which elements improved quitting success.

Keep in mind: Interviewees were deliberately selected, and this abstract-based account reports themes rather than quitting rates. Being embedded in a randomized trial does not make these interview findings a randomized comparison of treatment effectiveness.

Most studies in this review concluded that YouTube surgical videos did not adequately educate patients according to their assessment tools. Several studies described professional sources as more useful. These conclusions concern rated educational quality; they do not directly show what viewers learned, how anxious they felt, or how their surgical outcomes changed.

Keep in mind: Studies used different assessment instruments, including tools unique to individual studies. The abstract describes tool ratings rather than directly measured changes in patients' knowledge or anxiety.

Among people with COPD, a moderate flare-up in the baseline period was associated with higher rates of later flare-ups than having none. Death from any cause was also more frequent in the moderate-flare-up group. These observational results identify an association with a person's earlier flare-up history; they do not prove that the earlier event caused the later outcomes.

Keep in mind: The studies were observational. The abstract does not describe how differences between patient groups were accounted for, and it does not specify the follow-up timeframe for the pooled mortality estimate.

In pooled biopsy studies, music interventions were associated with statistically significant reductions in anxiety and pain. Favorable results were reported across age groups, with particular findings in prostate and bone marrow procedures. However, the abstract gives no effect sizes or control conditions, so it cannot establish how noticeable the changes were or how music compared with specific alternatives.

Keep in mind: The abstract does not report participant totals, pain or anxiety scales, effect sizes, or uncertainty intervals. Its authors call for larger, higher-quality randomized trials to strengthen the evidence supporting the findings.

Healthcare professionals more often viewed obesity as a disease than adults living with obesity or the general public. Across the reviewed research, recognition of contributing genetic factors was less common than recognition of inactivity or food intake as perceived causes. These findings describe people's understanding; they do not measure what caused obesity in individual participants.

Keep in mind: The abstract does not describe the wording of awareness questions, participant locations, or how responses varied between studies. Those missing details limit interpretation of the combined proportions and comparisons.

Evaluating artificial intelligence and fitting it into everyday imaging work were recurring implementation concerns. Some themes appeared as both helpful and obstructive, and their prominence varied across adoption stages. However, studies emphasized performance metrics more than clinicians' experiences or outcomes, limiting what the review can establish about successful integration into clinical practice.

Keep in mind: Most included studies did not directly report implementation barriers and facilitators. This abstract-based account also provides no detailed estimates connecting particular implementation factors with clinicians' outcomes or experiences.

The included evidence gave personalized exercise a more favorable cost-and-outcome profile than cognitive behavioral therapy. Comparisons with usual care were less straightforward, and the studies covered only multiple sclerosis and inflammatory rheumatic conditions. The review therefore cannot establish which fatigue intervention offers the best value across chronic illnesses or for an individual patient.

Keep in mind: The evidence covered few interventions and conditions, with several fatigue-related populations excluded. The abstract also omits the outcome unit underlying its monetary cost-effectiveness ratios, limiting interpretation of the economic estimates.

The review reports improvements in anxiety, depression, quality of life, and sexual function with nurse-led interventions for patients with gynecological cancers. These programs differed in purpose and content, and the evidence was not equally certain across outcomes. Without clear comparison care or follow-up in the abstract, the findings cannot establish which program offers a lasting advantage.

Keep in mind: Comparison care and follow-up are unspecified, and the infection estimate lacks a clear reference group. The review rated quality-of-life evidence as low certainty and reported substantial variation across studies.

The authors concluded that interventions involving needle techniques and approaches without invasive procedures benefited pain during fistula cannulation, meaning needle insertion into the dialysis access. However, the abstract does not report individual intervention results, comparison conditions or numerical pain reductions. It therefore supports only a broad summary of the authors’ conclusion, with lasting effects still uncertain.

Keep in mind: The authors identify differences across studies and a lack of follow-up research. Without pooled estimates or intervention-specific results in the abstract, the size and consistency of any benefit cannot be assessed.

Most reviewed studies reported favorable outcomes when artificial intelligence tools were used with electronic health records, or digital patient charts. These included less documentation time and fewer burnout symptoms among healthcare professionals. However, some studies lacked control groups, and small samples and short follow-up limited interpretation. The review therefore provides preliminary evidence rather than a firm estimate of benefit.

Keep in mind: The abstract identifies missing control groups, small samples and brief follow-up. It gives no numerical burnout effects or detailed comparison conditions, limiting assessment of how much symptoms changed and why.

The review examined whether non-insulin diabetes medicines affect complications involving small blood vessels. Some drug families showed favorable kidney measurements, but nerve and eye results were less consistent. The abstract also flagged a possible increase in diabetic retinal disease with semaglutide. These findings do not establish a single medicine as best across complications.

Keep in mind: The abstract gives no effect sizes, comparator details or follow-up durations. The authors describe the available results as conflicting or unclear, limiting assessment of the size and reliability of differences between medicines.

These analyses did not find a statistically significant reduction in medication dose burden from lifestyle interventions in older adults with physical limitations. The exception was an association with higher pain-medication dose burden in the SPRINTT intervention group over time. The overall null result does not establish that the programs had no effect on medication use.

Keep in mind: Medication burden was examined in secondary analyses, rather than trials specifically designed to test medication reduction. The abstract does not describe the control programs or report overall follow-up duration.

School-based programs aimed at reducing screen time produced modest reductions in screen use and increases in physical activity across the reviewed trials. The pooled result did not clearly establish a change in body mass index. High risk of bias and substantial differences between studies reduced confidence in most outcomes.

Keep in mind: Most outcomes had low-certainty evidence because of study bias and inconsistent findings. The abstract does not describe intervention lengths or control conditions, and its standardized effects cannot be interpreted as minutes of screen time saved.

The Central Sensitization Inventory had the highest overall ratings among the reviewed questionnaires and strong agreement when repeated in people with chronic pain. The review examined questionnaires used to assess manifestations of central sensitization. Its findings support this instrument's repeatability, while leaving other aspects of measurement quality incompletely established.

Keep in mind: Study quality varied, and most questionnaires had limited supporting evidence. Not every measurement property had been studied, so reliable repeat scores should not be read as complete validation of the instrument.

Among selected high-quality low back pain guidelines, many recommendations agreed fully or partly, but disagreement remained, especially for medicines. Agreement also differed depending on whether both the direction and strength of advice matched. This review measured consistency between documents; it did not determine which treatment works best or explain why recommendations diverged.

Keep in mind: Some guidelines made no recommendation for treatments addressed elsewhere, limiting what could be compared. The abstract does not explain reasons for disagreement or differences in deciding whether to issue advice.

Adding digital support to conventional care may modestly reduce fat mass in children and adolescents with obesity. Evidence for that outcome had moderate certainty, while effects on other important outcomes were unclear. Digital tools used alone also had unclear effects. The review could not establish lasting clinical benefit, and missing adverse-event data prevented an adequate safety assessment.

Keep in mind: The abstract does not explain the fat-mass percentage scale, so the numerical difference is omitted. No trial reported adverse-event data, and small studies limited assessment of lasting clinical benefit.

In studies of patients with cancer, network analysis—a method for mapping relationships among symptoms—repeatedly placed fatigue and psychological symptoms near the center of those relationships. The review suggests these symptoms deserve attention when studying the overall symptom experience, but it does not establish which symptom causes another or demonstrate an effective treatment strategy.

Keep in mind: The studies used different analytical methods and covered different cancers and treatment stages. The authors call for more consistent methods and studies following patients over time, limiting how confidently the recurring patterns can be generalized.