scholarly journals Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Prevalence of Coeliac Disease in Women with Infertility

Nutrients ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (8) ◽  
pp. 1950 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mercedes Castaño ◽  
Rubén Gómez-Gordo ◽  
David Cuevas ◽  
Concepción Núñez

We aimed to estimate the seroprevalence and the prevalence of coeliac disease (CD) in women with reproductive problems. A systematic review of English published articles until June 2019 was performed in PubMed and Scopus using the terms: (infertility and (coeliac disease OR gluten) OR (miscarriage and (coeliac disease OR gluten) OR (abortion and (coeliac disease OR gluten). All articles showing numerical data of anti-transglutaminase type 2 or anti-endomisium antibodies, or intestinal biopsy information were included. The study group comprised women with overall infertility, unexplained infertility, or recurrent spontaneous abortions. Two authors independently performed data extraction using a predefined data sheet. The initial search yielded 310 articles, and 23 were selected for data extraction. After meta-analysis, the pooled seroprevalence was very similar for overall and unexplained infertility, with a pooled proportion of around 1.3%–1.6%. This implies three times higher odds of having CD in infertility when compared to controls. The pooled prevalence could not be accurately calculated due to the small sample sizes. Further studies with increased sample sizes are necessary before giving specific recommendations for CD screening in women with reproductive problems, but current data seem to support a higher risk of CD in these women.

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Azeem Ahmad ◽  
Manohar S. Gundeti ◽  
Parth P. Dave ◽  
Sophia Jameela ◽  
Shruti Khanduri ◽  
...  

ABSTRACTObjectivesTo provide a broad evaluation of the efficacy and safety of Ayurveda interventions (procedural and non-procedural) for the management of sinusitis, and also of the relative efficacy and safety of different Ayurveda therapies for Sinusitis.MethodsFive electronic databases for published research articles, three databases for the unpublished doctoral thesis, clinical trial registries, and hand searches were done till August 2020. All comparative clinical trials recruiting sinusitis patients of any age group, receiving Ayurveda intervention, regardless of forms, dosages, and ingredients, for not less than one week were included. The data extraction and the risk of bias(RoB) assessment were done by two reviewers independently.ResultsA total of 2824 records were identified, of which 09 randomized parallel arms trials met inclusion criteria. No studies were found comparing Ayurveda versus placebo or non-Ayurveda interventions. Combined Ayurveda therapy (CT) was statistically more beneficial compared with either procedural or non-procedural Ayurveda therapy alone in reducing symptoms nasal discharge (standardized MD −0.71, 95% CI −1.16 to −0.26, I2 58%, 210 participants) and headache (standardized MD −0.44, 95% CI −0.86 to −0.02, I2 56%, 218 participants), however, no significant difference was found in reducing symptoms nasal obstruction and loss of smell. No numerical data related to the safety of Ayurveda intervention was found in included trials. Because, included trials(09) were having ‘high’ to ‘unclear’ overall bias, sub-standard methodology, and heterogeneity in results, the overall findings need to be interpreted cautiously.ConclusionsAlthough individual studies appeared to produce positive results, very low certainty of total effect(downgraded twice for RoB, once for inconsistency, indirectness, and imprecision each) hindered to arrive at any conclusion regarding efficacy or safety of Ayurveda interventions for sinusitis. There is a need for well-designed-executed-reported clinical studies on clinically relevant outcomes.PROSPERO registration numberRD42018103995ARTICLE SUMMARYStrength and limitations of this studyThis is the first systematic review to provide the status of available evidence on the efficacy and safety of Ayurveda interventions for sinusitis.The search strategy was comprehensive, all the relevant sources were searched for published as well as unpublished research works.This systematic review has a broad review question, which compromises its eternal validity.The certainty of the overall effect is ‘very low’ due to ‘unclear’ to ‘high’ overall risk of bias, lack of validated outcome measures, inconsistency in results with wide CIs, small sample sizes, incomplete reporting, etc.


BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. e040997
Author(s):  
Varo Kirthi ◽  
Paul Nderitu ◽  
Uazman Alam ◽  
Jennifer Evans ◽  
Sarah Nevitt ◽  
...  

IntroductionThere is growing evidence of a higher than expected prevalence of retinopathy in prediabetes. This paper presents the protocol of a systematic review and meta-analysis of retinopathy in prediabetes. The aim of the review is to estimate the prevalence of retinopathy in prediabetes and to summarise the current data.Methods and analysisThis protocol is developed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Protocols (PRISMA-P) guidelines. A comprehensive electronic bibliographic search will be conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Google Scholar and the Cochrane Library. Eligible studies will report prevalence data for retinopathy on fundus photography in adults with prediabetes. No time restrictions will be placed on the date of publication. Screening for eligible studies and data extraction will be conducted by two reviewers independently, using predefined inclusion criteria and prepiloted data extraction forms. Disagreements between the reviewers will be resolved by discussion, and if required, a third (senior) reviewer will arbitrate.The primary outcome is the prevalence of any standard features of diabetic retinopathy (DR) on fundus photography, as per International Clinical Diabetic Retinopathy Severity Scale (ICDRSS) classification. Secondary outcomes are the prevalence of (1) any retinal microvascular abnormalities on fundus photography that are not standard features of DR as per ICDRSS classification and (2) any macular microvascular abnormalities on fundus photography, including but not limited to the presence of macular exudates, microaneurysms and haemorrhages. Risk of bias for included studies will be assessed using a validated risk of bias tool for prevalence studies. Pooled estimates for the prespecified outcomes of interest will be calculated using random effects meta-analytic techniques. Heterogeneity will be assessed using the I2 statistic.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval is not required as this is a protocol for a systematic review and no primary data are to be collected. Findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and presentations at national and international meetings including Diabetes UK, European Association for the Study of Diabetes, American Diabetes Association and International Diabetes Federation conferences.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020184820.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Esperanza M. Garcia-Oropesa ◽  
Yoscelina E. Martinez-Lopez ◽  
Sonia Maria Ruiz-Cejudo ◽  
Jose Dario Martinez-Ezquerro ◽  
Alvaro Diaz-Badillo ◽  
...  

Mexicans and Mexican Americans share culture, genetic background, and predisposition for chronic complications associated with obesity and diabetes making imperative efficacious treatments and prevention. Obesity has been treated for centuries focused-on weight loss while other treatments on associated conditions like gout, diabetes (T2D), and hypertriglyceridemia. To date, there is no systematic review that synthetize the origin of obesity clinics in Mexico and the efforts to investigate treatments for obesity tested by randomized clinical trials (RCT). We conducted systematic searches in Pubmed, Scopus, and Web of Science to retrieve anti-obesity RCT through 2019 and without inferior temporal limit. The systematic review included RCT of anti-obesity treatments in the Mexican adult population, including alternative medicine, pharmacological, nutritional, behavioral, and surgical interventions reporting biometric outcomes such as BMI, weight, waist circumference, triglycerides, glucose, among others. Studies with at least three months of treatment were included in the meta-analysis. We found 634 entries, after removal of duplicates and screening the studies based on eligibility criteria, we analyzed 43, and 2 multinational-collaborative studies. Most of the national studies have small sample sizes, and the studied strategies do not have replications in the population. The nutrition/behavioral interventions were difficult to blind, and most studies have medium to high risk of bias. Nutritional/behavioral interventions and medications showed effects on BMI, waist circumference, and blood pressure. Simple measures like plain water instead of sweet beverages decrease triglycerides and systolic blood pressure. Participants with obesity and hypertension can have benefic effects with antioxidants, and treatment with insulin increase weight in those with T2D. The study of obesity in Mexico has been on-going for more than four decades, but the interest on RCT just increased until this millennium, but with small sample sizes and lack of replication. The interventions affect different metabolic syndrome components, which should be analyzed in detail with the population living on the U.S.-Mexico border; therefore, bi-national collaboration is desirable to disentangle the cultural effects on this population's treatment response.


BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (10) ◽  
pp. e038994
Author(s):  
Martha Maria Christine Elwenspoek ◽  
Joni Jackson ◽  
Sarah Dawson ◽  
Hazel Everitt ◽  
Peter Gillett ◽  
...  

IntroductionCoeliac disease (CD) is a systemic immune-mediated disorder triggered by gluten in genetically predisposed individuals. CD is diagnosed using a combination of serology tests and endoscopic biopsy of the small intestine. However, because of non-specific symptoms and heterogeneous clinical presentation, diagnosing CD is challenging. Early detection of CD through improved case-finding strategies can improve the response to a gluten-free diet, patients’ quality of life and potentially reduce the risk of complications. However, there is a lack of consensus in which groups may benefit from active case-finding.Methods and analysisWe will perform a systematic review to determine the accuracy of diagnostic indicators (such as symptoms and risk factors) for CD in adults and children, and thus can help identify patients who should be offered CD testing. MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library and Web of Science will be searched from 1997 until 2020. Screening will be performed in duplicate. Data extraction will be performed by one and checked by a second reviewer. Disagreements will be resolved through discussion or referral to a third reviewer. We will produce a narrative summary of identified prediction models. Studies, where 2×2 data can be extracted or reconstructed, will be treated as diagnostic accuracy studies, that is, the diagnostic indicators are the index tests and CD serology and/or biopsy is the reference standard. For each diagnostic indicator, we will perform a bivariate random-effects meta-analysis of the sensitivity and specificity.Ethics and disseminationResults will be reported in peer-reviewed journals, academic and public presentations and social media. We will convene an implementation panel to advise on the optimum strategy for enhanced dissemination. We will discuss findings with Coeliac UK to help with dissemination to patients. Ethical approval is not applicable, as this is a systematic review and no research participants will be involved.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020170766.


2014 ◽  
Vol 94 (10) ◽  
pp. 1383-1395 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benjamin Waller ◽  
Anna Ogonowska-Slodownik ◽  
Manuel Vitor ◽  
Johan Lambeck ◽  
Daniel Daly ◽  
...  

BackgroundCurrent management of osteoarthritis (OA) focuses on pain control and maintaining physical function through pharmacological, nonpharmacological, and surgical treatments. Exercise, including therapeutic aquatic exercise (TAE), is considered one of the most important management options. Nevertheless, there is no up-to-date systematic review describing the effect of TAE on symptoms and function associated with lower limb OA.PurposeThe purpose of this study was to conduct a systematic review with meta-analysis to determine the effect of TAE on symptoms and function associated with lower limb OA.Data SourcesThe data sources used in this study were: MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, PEDro, and SPORTDiscus.Study SelectionAll studies selected for review were randomized controlled trials with an aquatic exercise group and a nontreatment control group. In total, 11 studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria and were included in the synthesis and meta-analysis.Data ExtractionData were extracted and checked for accuracy by 3 independent reviewers.Data SynthesisStandardized mean difference (SMD) with 95% confidence interval (95% CI) was calculated for all outcomes. The meta-analysis showed a significant TAE effect on pain (SMD=0.26 [95% CI=0.11, 0.41]), self-reported function (SMD=0.30 [95% CI=0.18, 0.43]), and physical functioning (SMD=0.22 [95% CI=0.07, 0.38]). Additionally, a significant effect was seen on stiffness (SMD=0.20 [95% CI=0.03, 0.36]) and quality of life (SMD=0.24 [95% CI=0.04, 0.45]).LimitationsHeterogeneity of outcome measures and small sample sizes for many of the included trials imply that conclusions based on these results should be made with caution.ConclusionsThe results indicate that TAE is effective in managing symptoms associated with lower limb OA.


Cancers ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 45
Author(s):  
Kim J. W. Chang Sing Pang ◽  
Taha Mur ◽  
Louise Collins ◽  
Sowmya R. Rao ◽  
Daniel L. Faden

Human papillomavirus (HPV) drives tumorigenesis in a subset of oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinomas (OPSCC) and is increasing in prevalence across the world. Mounting evidence suggests HPV is also involved in a subset of sinonasal squamous cell carcinomas (SNSCC), yet small sample sizes and variability of HPV detection techniques in existing literature hinder definitive conclusions. A systematic review was performed by searching literature through March 29th 2020 using PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science Core Collection databases. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed by two authors independently. A meta-analysis was performed using the random-effects model. Sixty studies (n = 1449) were eligible for statistical analysis estimating an overall HPV prevalence of 25.5% (95% CI 20.7–31.0). When stratified by HPV detection method, prevalence with multiple substrate testing (20.5%, 95% CI 14.5–28.2) was lower than with single substrate testing (31.7%, 95% CI 23.6–41.1), highest in high-exposure anatomic subsites (nasal cavity and ethmoids) (37.6%, 95% CI 26.5–50.2) vs. low-exposure (15.1%, 95% CI 7.3–28.6) and highest in high HPV+ OPSCC prevalence geographic regions (North America) (30.9%, 95% CI 21.9–41.5) vs. low (Africa) (13.1, 95% CI 6.5–24.5)). While small sample sizes and variability in data cloud firm conclusions, here, we provide a new reference point prevalence for HPV in SNSCC along with orthogonal data supporting a causative role for virally driven tumorigenesis, including that HPV is more commonly found in sinonasal subsites with increased exposure to refluxed oropharyngeal secretions and in geographic regions where HPV+ OPSCC is more prevalent.


2020 ◽  
Vol 133 (1) ◽  
pp. 71-78 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anthony T. Lee ◽  
John F. Burke ◽  
Pranathi Chunduru ◽  
Annette M. Molinaro ◽  
Robert Knowlton ◽  
...  

OBJECTIVERecent trials for temporal lobe epilepsy (TLE) highlight the challenges of investigating surgical outcomes using randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Although several reviews have examined seizure-freedom outcomes from existing data, there is a need for an overall seizure-freedom rate estimated from level I data as investigators consider other methods besides RCTs to study outcomes related to new surgical interventions.METHODSThe authors performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of the 3 RCTs of TLE in adults and report an overall surgical seizure-freedom rate (Engel class I) composed of level I data. An overall seizure-freedom rate was also collected from level II data (prospective cohort studies) for validation. Eligible studies were identified by filtering a published Cochrane meta-analysis of epilepsy surgery for RCTs and prospective studies, and supplemented by searching indexed terms in MEDLINE (January 1, 2012–April 1, 2018). Retrospective studies were excluded to minimize heterogeneity in patient selection and reporting bias. Data extraction was independently reverified and pooled using a fixed-effects model. The primary outcome was overall seizure freedom following surgery. The historical benchmark was applied in a noninferiority study design to compare its power to a single-study cohort.RESULTSThe overall rate of seizure freedom from level I data was 72.4% (55/76 patients, 3 RCTs), which was nearly identical to the overall seizure-freedom rate of 71.7% (1325/1849 patients, 18 studies) from prospective cohorts (z = 0.134, p = 0.89; z-test). Seizure-freedom rates from level I and II studies were consistent over the years of publication (R2< 0.01, p = 0.73). Surgery resulted in markedly improved seizure-free outcomes compared to medical management (RR 10.82, 95% CI 3.93–29.84, p < 0.01; 2 RCTs). Noninferiority study designs in which the historical benchmark was used had significantly higher power at all difference margins compared to using a single cohort alone (p < 0.001, Bonferroni’s multiple comparison test).CONCLUSIONSThe overall rate of seizure freedom for temporal lobe surgery is approximately 70% for medically refractory epilepsy. The small sample size of the RCT cohort underscores the need to move beyond standard RCTs for epilepsy surgery. This historical seizure-freedom rate may serve as a useful benchmark to guide future study designs for new surgical treatments for refractory TLE.


BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (6) ◽  
pp. e047283
Author(s):  
Rosalind Gittins ◽  
Louise Missen ◽  
Ian Maidment

IntroductionThere is a growing concern about the misuse of over the counter (OTC) and prescription only medication (POM) because of the impact on physical and mental health, drug interactions, overdoses and drug-related deaths. These medicines include opioid analgesics, anxiolytics such as pregabalin and diazepam and antidepressants. This protocol outlines how a systematic review will be undertaken (during June 2021), which aims to examine the literature on the pattern of OTC and POM misuse among adults who are accessing substance misuse treatment services. It will include the types of medication being taken, prevalence and demographic characteristics of people who access treatment services.Methods and analysisAn electronic search will be conducted on the Cochrane, OVID Medline, Pubmed, Scopus and Web of Science databases as well as grey literature. Two independent reviewers will conduct the initial title and abstract screenings, using predetermined criteria for inclusion and exclusion. If selected for inclusion, full-text data extraction will be conducted using a pilot-tested data extraction form. A third reviewer will resolve disagreements if consensus cannot be reached. Quality and risk of bias assessment will be conducted for all included studies. A qualitative synthesis and summary of the data will be provided. If possible, a meta-analysis with heterogeneity calculation will be conducted; otherwise, Synthesis Without Meta-analysis will be undertaken for quantitative data. The reporting of this protocol follows the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval is not required. Findings will be peer reviewed, published and shared verbally, electronically and in print, with interested clinicians and policymakers.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020135216.


Author(s):  
Antonio Jose Martin-Perez ◽  
María Fernández-González ◽  
Paula Postigo-Martin ◽  
Marc Sampedro Pilegaard ◽  
Carolina Fernández-Lao ◽  
...  

There is no systematic review that has identified existing studies evaluating the pharmacological and non-pharmacological intervention for pain management in patients with bone metastasis. To fill this gap in the literature, this systematic review with meta-analysis aims to evaluate the effectiveness of different antalgic therapies (pharmacological and non-pharmacological) in the improvement of pain of these patients. To this end, this protocol has been written according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) and registered in PROSPERO (CRD42020135762). A systematic search will be carried out in four international databases: Medline (Via PubMed), Web of Science, Cochrane Library and SCOPUS, to select the randomized controlled clinical trials. The Risk of Bias Tool developed by Cochrane will be used to assess the risk of bias and the quality of the identified studies. A narrative synthesis will be used to describe and compare the studies, and after the data extraction, random effects model and a subgroup analyses will be performed according to the type of intervention, if possible. This protocol aims to generate a systematic review that compiles and synthesizes the best and most recent evidence on the treatment of pain derived from vertebral metastasis.


BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (6) ◽  
pp. e047439
Author(s):  
Rayan Jafnan Alharbi ◽  
Virginia Lewis ◽  
Sumina Shrestha ◽  
Charne Miller

IntroductionThe introduction of trauma systems that began in the 1970s resulted in improved trauma care and a decreased rate of morbidity and mortality of trauma patients. Worldwide, little is known about the effectiveness of trauma care system at different stages of development, from establishing a trauma centre, to implementing a trauma system and as trauma systems mature. The objective of this study is to extract and analyse data from research that evaluates mortality rates according to different stages of trauma system development globally.Methods and analysisThe proposed review will comply with the checklist of the ‘Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis’. In this review, only peer-reviewed articles written in English, human-related studies and published between January 2000 and December 2020 will be included. Articles will be retrieved from MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL. Additional articles will be identified from other sources such as references of included articles and author lists. Two independent authors will assess the eligibility of studies as well as critically appraise and assess the methodological quality of all included studies using the Cochrane Risk of Bias for Non-randomised Studies of Interventions tool. Two independent authors will extract the data to minimise errors and bias during the process of data extraction using an extraction tool developed by the authors. For analysis calculation, effect sizes will be expressed as risk ratios or ORs for dichotomous data or weighted (or standardised) mean differences and 95% CIs for continuous data in this systematic review.Ethics and disseminationThis systematic review will use secondary data only, therefore, research ethics approval is not required. The results from this study will be submitted to a peer-review journal for publication and we will present our findings at national and international conferences.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42019142842.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document