Diabetic nephropathy(DN), a prevalent microvascular complication of diabetes, has emerged as a leading cause of end-stage renal disease worldwide. Recent studies on the dual-specific phosphatase (DUSP) family have revealed a significant reduction in DUSP expression levels in renal disease, suggesting that enhancing its expression may mitigate or alleviate the symptoms associated with renal disease. The primary function of DUSP is to mediate the dephosphorylation of mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK), which effectively inhibits the activation of the MAPK pathway, thus playing a crucial regulatory role in the onset and progression of DN. This article aims to investigate the correlation between DN and DUSP and to summarize the current research advancements concerning DUSP in the context of DN, providing new insights and essential theoretical foundations for its diagnosis and treatment.

Methodological quality assessment is a pivotal link between primary studies and reliable evidence-based practice,and an essential pathway for operationalizing the core principles of the Guide on Methodological Standards in Pharmacoepidemiology(2nd edition).A prevalent challenge in practice,however,is the conflation of appraising methodological robustness(risk of bias assessment)with verifying reporting transparency(adherence to reporting guidelines).This paper systematically addresses this fundamental challenge,beginning with a clear distinction between the essence and boundaries of these two concepts.On this basis,the article provides a comprehensive review of mainstream quality assessment tools,covering the methodological features and evolutionary trajectory of numerous instruments for interventional(e.g.,RoB 2,ROBINS-I),observational(e.g.,NOS,the JBI/SIGN/NIH series),secondary(e.g.,AMSTAR 2),and other specific types of studies such as health economic evaluations.Furthermore,a complete case study is used to illustrate the practical application of the ROBINS-I tool.The paper's central thesis advocates for an"appraisal-informed design"philosophy,urging a conceptual shift from the retrospective critique of existing literature to the prospective quality control of new research by internalizing appraisal standards as design principles,while also exploring the emerging paradigm of artificial intelligence in assisting assessment.This paper provides a comprehensive methodological reference for researchers and practitioners to prudently select appropriate assessment tools and to conduct rigorous critical appraisals of pharmacoepidemiological evidence.

Methodological quality assessment is a pivotal link between primary studies and reliable evidence-based practice,and an essential pathway for operationalizing the core principles of the Guide on Methodological Standards in Pharmacoepidemiology(2nd edition).A prevalent challenge in practice,however,is the conflation of appraising methodological robustness(risk of bias assessment)with verifying reporting transparency(adherence to reporting guidelines).This paper systematically addresses this fundamental challenge,beginning with a clear distinction between the essence and boundaries of these two concepts.On this basis,the article provides a comprehensive review of mainstream quality assessment tools,covering the methodological features and evolutionary trajectory of numerous instruments for interventional(e.g.,RoB 2,ROBINS-I),observational(e.g.,NOS,the JBI/SIGN/NIH series),secondary(e.g.,AMSTAR 2),and other specific types of studies such as health economic evaluations.Furthermore,a complete case study is used to illustrate the practical application of the ROBINS-I tool.The paper's central thesis advocates for an"appraisal-informed design"philosophy,urging a conceptual shift from the retrospective critique of existing literature to the prospective quality control of new research by internalizing appraisal standards as design principles,while also exploring the emerging paradigm of artificial intelligence in assisting assessment.This paper provides a comprehensive methodological reference for researchers and practitioners to prudently select appropriate assessment tools and to conduct rigorous critical appraisals of pharmacoepidemiological evidence.

Objective:To evaluate the effects of a single general anesthesia on neurodevelopment in preschool children.Methods:American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status Ⅰ-Ⅱchildren of either sex, aged 3-6 yr, who were undergoing dental treatment under general anesthesia or non-general anesthesia, were enrolled in the study.Children in general anesthesia group received dental treatment under general anesthesia, while children in control group received pit and fissure sealant.In general anesthesia group, the children entered the operating room accompanied by their parents and inhaled 50% nitrous oxide and 8% sevoflurane, propofol 2 mg/kg, fentanyl 2 μg/kg, and cisatracurium 0.1 mg/kg and dexamethasone 0.2 mg/kg were intravenously injected, mechanical ventilation was performed after nasotracheal intubation under the guidance of a video laryngoscope, and anesthesia was maintained through inhalation of 2.5%-3.0% sevoflurane.The outcomes of neurodevelopment were assessed and scored using Wechsler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence, Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function, and Adaptive Behavior Assessment System.Results:Forty-four children were included in general anesthesia group and 19 children in non-general anesthesia group.There were no significant differences between the two groups in the changes in the scores of Wechsler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence, Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function, and Adaptive Behavior Assessment System before anesthesia and at 6 months after operation ( P>0.05). Conclusions:A single general anesthesia exerts no significant effect on neurodevelopment in preschool children.

Objective To investigate the effect of sodium arsenite (NaAsO2) on the expression of miRNA-21 (miR-21) mediated by transcription factor ETS-1 in human normal hepatocytes (L-02).Methods Dose-effect study:The L-02 cells were treated with different doses of NaAsO2 [0.0 (control),2.5,5.0,10.0,20.0,40.0 μmol/L] for 24 h.Time-effect study:L-02 cells were exposed to 0 (control) and 20 μmol/L NaAsO2 for 12,24,36 and 48 h (n =6).ETS-1 and miR-21 were treated with ETS-1 shRNA and miR-21 inhibitor,respectively.The cells treated with ETS-1 shRNA (100 nmol/L) were divided into 4 groups:①ETS-1 shRNA NC treatment alone (control group);②ETS-1 shRNA NC combined with NaAsO2 (20 μ,mol/L) treatment group;③ETS-1 shRNA treatment alone group;④Treatment with ETS-1 shRNA and NaAsO2 (20 μmol/L) group.The MiR-21 inhibitor (100 nmol/L) treated cells were also divided into 4 groups:① miR-21 inhibitor NC treatment (control group);② miR-21 inhibitor NC combined with NaAsO2 (20 μmol/L);③miR-21 inhibitor group;④miR-21 inhibitor combined with NaAsO2 (20 μ mol/L) treatment group.The expression of ETS-1 mRNA and miR-21 were detected by quantitative real-time PCR (qRT-PCR);the protein expression of ETS-1 was detected by Western blotting.Results Dose-effect study:The expression of ETS-1 mRNA in the groups of 0.0 (control),2.5,5.0,10.0,20.0 and 40.0 μmol/L was 1.008 ± 0.028,1.552 ± 0.029,1.697 ± 0.050,1.842 ± 0.077,2.233 ± 0.096 and 2.235 ± 0.092;miR-21 expression was 1.025 ± 0.094,1.552 ± 0.072,1.683 ± 0.066,1.915 ± 0.171,2.337 ± 0.195 and 2.592 ± 0.177;the expression of ETS-1 protein was 1.060 ± 0.045,1.267 ± 0.160,1.386 ± 0.087,1.723 ± 0.196,2.208 ± 0.122 and 2.284 ± 0.224,respectively,and the differences were statistically significant (F =47.797,8.959,65.748,all P ＜ 0.05),the NaAsO2 dose groups were significantly higher than those of the control group (all P ＜ 0.05),and there was a dose-effect relationship.Time-effect study:The expression of ETS-1 mRNA in L-02 cells was 1.253 ± 0.175,1.623 ± 0.220,1.771 ± 0.324 and 1.913 ± 0.251,respectively at 12,24,36 and 48 h;the expression of miR-21 was 1.502 ± 0.111,1.716 ± 0.113,1.979 ± 0.186 and 2.452 ± 0.304;the expression of ETS-1 protein was 1.196 ± 0.105,1.502 ± 0.076,1.651 ± 0.074 and 1.839 ± 0.139,respectively,there were significant differences between the groups (F =14.936,39.180,39.441,all P ＜ 0.05).The expression of various time points of exposure to NaAsO2 was significantly higher than those in the control group (1.044 ± 0.115,1.044 ± 0.124,1.108 ± 0.088,1.053 ± 0.061;1.092 ± 0.061,1.096 ± 0.169,1.024 ± 0.111,1.057 ± 0.146;1.020 ± 0.017,1.049 ± 0.121,1.024 ± 0.089,1.031 ± 0.124,all P＜ 0.05),and there was a time-effect relationship.ETS-1 shRNA and miR-21 inhibitor treatment:compared with ETS-1 shRNA NC combined with NaAsO2 (20 μmol/L),ETS-1 shRNA and NaAsO2 (20 μmol/L) could significantly inhibit the expression of ETS-1 (0.912 ± 0.238 vs 1.641 ± 0.225,P ＜ 0.05),and down-regulated the expression of miR-21 (1.313 ± 0.334 vs 2.363 ± 0.252,P ＜ 0.05).There was no significant difference of ETS-1 mRNA expression between miR-21 inhibitor and NaAsO2 (20.μmol/L) group (1.580 ± 0.077 vs 1.576 ± 0.065,P ＞ 0.05) compared with miR-21 inhibitor NC and NaAsO2 (20 μmol/L).Conclusions The expression of ETS-1 and miR-21 in L-02 cells is significantly higher than those in control.The high expression of ETS-1 mediates NaAsO2-induced miR-21 overexpression,which may be an important molecular mechanism of arsenic-induced expression dysregulation of human hepatic miRNAs and liver damage.