In December 2019, a new type viral pneumonia cases occurred in Wuhan, Hubei Province; and then named “2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV)” by the World Health Organization (WHO) on 12 January 2020. For it is a never been experienced respiratory disease before and with infection ability widely and quickly, it attracted the world’s attention but without treatment and control manual. For the request from frontline clinicians and public health professionals of 2019-nCoV infected pneumonia management, an evidence-based guideline urgently needs to be developed. Therefore, we drafted this guideline according to the rapid advice guidelines methodology and general rules of WHO guideline development; we also added the first-hand management data of Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University. This guideline includes the guideline methodology, epidemiological characteristics, disease screening and population prevention, diagnosis, treatment and control (including traditional Chinese Medicine), nosocomial infection prevention and control, and disease nursing of the 2019-nCoV. Moreover, we also provide a whole process of a successful treatment case of the severe 2019-nCoV infected pneumonia and experience and lessons of hospital rescue for 2019-nCoV infections. This rapid advice guideline is suitable for the first frontline doctors and nurses, managers of hospitals and healthcare sections, community residents, public health persons, relevant researchers, and all person who are interested in the 2019-nCoV.

Methodological quality (risk of bias) assessment is an important step before study initiation usage. Therefore, accurately judging study type is the first priority, and the choosing proper tool is also important. In this review, we introduced methodological quality assessment tools for randomized controlled trial (including individual and cluster), animal study, non-randomized interventional studies (including follow-up study, controlled before-and-after study, before-after/ pre-post study, uncontrolled longitudinal study, interrupted time series study), cohort study, case-control study, cross-sectional study (including analytical and descriptive), observational case series and case reports, comparative effectiveness research, diagnostic study, health economic evaluation, prediction study (including predictor finding study, prediction model impact study, prognostic prediction model study), qualitative study, outcome measurement instruments (including patient - reported outcome measure development, content validity, structural validity, internal consistency, cross-cultural validity/ measurement invariance, reliability, measurement error, criterion validity, hypotheses testing for construct validity, and responsiveness), systematic review and meta-analysis, and clinical practice guideline. The readers of our review can distinguish the types of medical studies and choose appropriate tools. In one word, comprehensively mastering relevant knowledge and implementing more practices are basic requirements for correctly assessing the methodological quality.

Background: The burden of common urologic diseases, including benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH), urinary tract infections (UTI), urolithiasis, bladder cancer, kidney cancer, and prostate cancer, varies both geographically and within specific regions. It is essential to conduct a comprehensive and precise assessment of the global burden of urologic diseases. Methods: We obtained data on incidence, prevalence, mortality, and disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) for the aforementioned urologic diseases by age, sex, location, and year from the Global Burden of Disease (GBD) 2021. We analyzed the burden associated with urologic diseases based on socio-demographic index (SDI) and attributable risk factors. The trends in burden over time were assessed using estimated annual percentage changes (EAPC) along with a 95% confidence interval (CI). Results: In 2021, BPH and UTI were the leading causes of age-standardized incidence rate (ASIR) and age-standardized prevalence rate (ASPR), with rates of 5531.88 and 2782.59 per 100,000 persons, respectively. Prostate cancer was the leading cause of both age-standardized mortality rate (ASMR) and age-standardized DALYs rate (ASDR), with rates of 12.63 and 217.83 per 100,000 persons, respectively. From 1990 to 2021, there was an upward trend in ASIR, ASPR, ASMR, and ASDR for UTI, while urolithiasis showed a downward trend. The middle and low-middle SDI quintile levels exhibited higher incidence, prevalence, mortality, and DALYs related to UTI, urolithiasis, and BPH, while the high and high-middle SDI quintile levels showed higher rates for the three cancers. The burden of these six urologic diseases displayed diverse age and sex distribution patterns. In 2021, a high body mass index (BMI) contributed to 20.07% of kidney cancer deaths worldwide, while smoking accounted for 26.48% of bladder cancer deaths and 3.00% of prostate cancer deaths. Conclusions: The global burden of 6 urologic diseases presents a significant public health challenge. Urgent international collaboration is essential to advance the improvement of urologic disease management, encompassing the development of effective diagnostic screening tools and the implementation of high-quality prevention and treatment strategies.

Background: Clinical practice guidelines or recommendations often require timely and regular updating as new evidence emerges, because this can alter the risk-benefit trade-off. The scientific process of developing and updating guidelines accompanied by adequate implementation can improve outcomes. To promote better management of patients receiving vancomycin therapy, we updated the guideline for the therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) of vancomycin published in 2015.Methods: Our updated recommendations complied with standards for developing trustworthy guidelines, including timeliness and rigor of the updating process, as well as the use of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. We also followed the methodology handbook published by the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence and the Spanish National Health System.Results: We partially updated the 2015 guideline. Apart from adults, the updated guideline also focuses on pediatric patients and neonates requiring intravenous vancomycin therapy. The guideline recommendations involve a broadened range of patients requiring TDM, modified index of TDM (both 24-hour area under the curve and trough concentration), addition regarding the necessity and timing of repeated TDM, and initial dose for specific subpopulations. Overall, 1 recommendation was deleted and 3 recommendations were modified. Eleven new recommendations were added, and no recommendation was made for 2 clinical questions.Conclusions: We updated an evidence-based guideline regarding the TDM of vancomycin using a rigorous and multidisciplinary approach. The updated guideline provides more comprehensive recommendations to inform rational and optimized vancomycin use and is thus of greater applicability.