Education interventions in Chinese cardiac patients on health behaviours, disease-related knowledge, and health outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Abstract Obesity has been shown to intensify the decline of physical function and lead to frailty. Nutrition is an important method in managing obesity and frailty, while seldom reviews have ever explored the effects of nutritional education interventions. We conducted a systematic review (PROSPERO: CRD42019142403) to explore the effectiveness of nutritional education interventions in managing body composition and physio-psychosocial parameters related to frailty. Randomized controlled trials and quasi-experimental studies were searched in CINAHL, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, PubMed and Scopus from 2001 to 2019. Hand search for the reference lists of included papers was conducted as well. We assessed the quality of included studies by Cochrane risk of bias tool. Meta-analyses and narrative synthesis were used to analyse the data. Two studies with low risk of bias were screened from 180 articles, which involved 177 older people with an average age of 69.69±4.08 years old. The results showed that nutritional education was significantly effective in reducing body weight and fat mass than exercises, and it was beneficial to enhancing physical function and psychosocial well-being. But the effects of nutritional education in increasing muscle strength were not better than exercises. The combined effects of nutritional education and exercises were superior than either exercises or nutritional education interventions solely in preventing the loss of lean mass and bone marrow density, and in improving physical function. Due to limited numbers of relevant studies, the strong evidence of effectiveness of nutritional education interventions on reversing frailty is still lacking.

Download Full-text

Health Outcomes of Parents of Children with Chronic Illness: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

The Journal of Pediatrics ◽

10.1016/j.jpeds.2019.10.068 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 218 ◽

pp. 166-177.e2 ◽

Cited By ~ 6

Author(s):

Liel N. Cohn ◽

Petros Pechlivanoglou ◽

Yuna Lee ◽

Sanjay Mahant ◽

Julia Orkin ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Chronic Illness ◽

Health Outcomes ◽

Meta Analysis

Download Full-text

Updated systematic review and meta-analysis of studies examining the relationship between reported racism and health and well-being for children and youth: a protocol

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2020-043722 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 11 (6) ◽

pp. e043722

Author(s):

Naomi Priest ◽

Kate Doery ◽

Mandy Truong ◽

Shuaijun Guo ◽

Ryan Perry ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Health Outcomes ◽

Research Policy ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Well Being ◽

Children And Youth ◽

Effect Sizes ◽

Future Research ◽

Critical Determinant ◽

Health And Well Being

IntroductionRacism is a critical determinant of health and health inequities for children and youth. This protocol aims to update the first systematic review conducted by Priest et al (2013), including a meta-analysis of findings. Based on previous empirical data, it is anticipated that child and youth health will be negatively impacted by racism. Findings from this review will provide updated evidence of effect sizes across outcomes and identify moderators and mediators of relationships between racism and health.Methods and analysisThis systematic review and meta-analysis will include studies that examine associations between experiences of racism and racial discrimination with health outcomes of children and youth aged 0–24 years. Exposure measures include self-reported or proxy reported systemic, interpersonal and intrapersonal racism. Outcome measures include general health and well-being, physical health, mental health, biological markers, healthcare utilisation and health behaviours. A comprehensive search of studies from the earliest time available to October 2020 will be conducted. A random effects meta-analysis will examine the average effect of racism on a range of health outcomes. Study-level moderation will test the difference in effect sizes with regard to various sample and exposure characteristics. This review has been registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews.Ethics and disseminationThis review will provide evidence for future research within the field and help to support policy and practice development. Results will be widely disseminated to both academic and non-academic audiences through peer-review publications, community summaries and presentations to research, policy, practice and community audiences.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020184055.

Download Full-text

Understanding the influence of socioeconomic status on the association between combinations of lifestyle factors and adverse health outcomes: a systematic review protocol

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2020-042212 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 11 (5) ◽

pp. e042212

Author(s):

Hamish Foster ◽

Peter Polz ◽

Frances Mair ◽

Jason Gill ◽

Catherine A O'Donnell

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Socioeconomic Status ◽

Health Outcomes ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Lifestyle Factors ◽

Lifestyle Factor ◽

Unhealthy Lifestyle ◽

Adverse Health ◽

Adverse Health Outcomes ◽

The Impact

IntroductionCombinations of unhealthy lifestyle factors are strongly associated with mortality, cardiovascular disease (CVD) and cancer. It is unclear how socioeconomic status (SES) affects those associations. Lower SES groups may be disproportionately vulnerable to the effects of unhealthy lifestyle factors compared with higher SES groups via interactions with other factors associated with low SES (eg, stress) or via accelerated biological ageing. This systematic review aims to synthesise studies that examine how SES moderates the association between lifestyle factor combinations and adverse health outcomes. Greater understanding of how lifestyle risk varies across socioeconomic spectra could reduce adverse health by (1) identifying novel high-risk groups or targets for future interventions and (2) informing research, policy and interventions that aim to support healthy lifestyles in socioeconomically deprived communities.Methods and analysisThree databases will be searched (PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL) from inception to March 2020. Reference lists, citations and grey literature will also be searched. Inclusion criteria are: (1) prospective cohort studies; (2) investigations of two key exposures: (a) lifestyle factor combinations of at least three lifestyle factors (eg, smoking, physical activity and diet) and (b) SES (eg, income, education or poverty index); (3) an assessment of the impact of SES on the association between combinations of unhealthy lifestyle factors and health outcomes; (4) at least one outcome from—mortality (all cause, CVD and cancer), CVD or cancer incidence. Two independent reviewers will screen titles, abstracts and full texts of included studies. Data extraction will focus on cohort characteristics, exposures, direction and magnitude of SES effects, methods and quality (via Newcastle-Ottawa Scale). If appropriate, a meta-analysis, pooling the effects of SES, will be performed. Alternatively, a synthesis without meta-analysis will be conducted.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval is not required. Results will be disseminated via peer-reviewed publication, professional networks, social media and conference presentations.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020172588.

Download Full-text