scholarly journals Objective sensory testing methods reveal a higher prevalence of olfactory loss in COVID-19 positive patients compared to subjective methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mackenzie E Hannum ◽  
Vicente A Ramirez ◽  
Sarah J Lipson ◽  
Riley D Herriman ◽  
Aurora K Toskala ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Objective Measures ◽  
Subjective Measures ◽  
Olfactory Loss ◽  
Point Estimates ◽  
Pooled Prevalence ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Subjective Measurements ◽  
Olfactory Disturbance ◽  
Smell Loss

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS−CoV−2), which causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID−19), has currently infected over 6.5 million people worldwide. In response to the pandemic, numerous studies have tried to identify the causes and symptoms of the disease. Emerging evidence supports recently acquired anosmia (complete loss of smell) and hyposmia (partial loss of smell) as symptoms of COVID−19, but studies of olfactory dysfunction show a wide range of prevalence, from 5% to 98%. We undertook a search of Pubmed/Medline and Google Scholar with the keywords 'COVID−19', 'smell', and/or 'olfaction'. We included any study that quantified olfactory loss as a symptom of COVID%[minus]19. Studies were grouped and compared based on the type of method used to measure smell loss − subjective measures such as self−reported smell loss versus objective measures using rated stimuli − to determine if prevalence rate differed by method type. For each study, 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated from point estimates of olfactory disturbance rates. We identified 34 articles quantifying anosmia as a symptom of COVID−19, collected from cases identified from January 16 to April 30, 2020. The pooled prevalence estimate of smell loss was 77% when assessed through objective measurements (95% CI of 61.4-89.2%) and 45% with subjective measurements (95% CI of 31.1-58.5%). Objective measures are a more sensitive method to identify smell loss as a result of infection with SARS−CoV−2. The use of subjective measures, while expedient during the early stages of the pandemic, underestimates the true prevalence of smell loss.

scholarly journals Objective sensory testing methods reveal a higher prevalence of olfactory loss in COVID-19–positive patients compared to subjective methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mackenzie E Hannum ◽  
Vicente A Ramirez ◽  
Sarah J Lipson ◽  
Riley D Herriman ◽  
Aurora K Toskala ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Objective Measures ◽  
Subjective Measures ◽  
Partial Loss ◽  
Olfactory Loss ◽  
Point Estimates ◽  
Pooled Prevalence ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Subjective Measurements ◽  
Smell Loss

Abstract Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), which causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), has currently infected over 6.5 million people worldwide. In response to the pandemic, numerous studies have tried to identify causes and symptoms of the disease. Emerging evidence supports recently acquired anosmia (complete loss of smell) and hyposmia (partial loss of smell) as symptoms of COVID-19, but studies of olfactory dysfunction show a wide range of prevalence, from 5% to 98%. We undertook a search of Pubmed/Medline and Google Scholar with the keywords “COVID-19,” “smell,” and/or “olfaction.” We included any study that quantified smell loss (anosmia and hyposmia) as a symptom of COVID-19. Studies were grouped and compared based on the type of method used to measure smell loss—subjective measures such as self-reported smell loss versus objective measures using rated stimuli—to determine if prevalence differed by method type. For each study, 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated from point estimates of olfactory disturbances. We identified 34 articles quantifying anosmia as a symptom of COVID-19 (6 objective, 28 subjective), collected from cases identified from January 16 to April 30, 2020. The pooled prevalence estimate of smell loss was 77% when assessed through objective measurements (95% CI of 61.4-89.2%) and 44% with subjective measurements (95% CI of 32.2-57.0%). Objective measures are a more sensitive method to identify smell loss as a result of infection with SARS-CoV-2; the use of subjective measures, while expedient during the early stages of the pandemic, underestimates the true prevalence of smell loss.

The Divergence of Objective and Subjective Situation Awareness: A Meta-Analysis

2019 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 34-53 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mica R. Endsley
Keyword(s):  
Situation Awareness ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Measurement Techniques ◽  
Subjective Measures ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Confidence Calibration

A review of 37 studies that included both objective and subjective measures of situation awareness (SA) was conducted. Objective and subjective measures of SA were found to diverge across a wide range of measurement techniques. Reasons for these differences include a lack of meta-awareness about one’s own SA, poor SA/confidence calibration, and confounds with workload among some measures. A model that shows how objective and subjective SA combine to affect performance is presented.

scholarly journals Prevalence of Calf Mortality in Ethiopia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 ◽  
pp. 1-10
Author(s):  
Ephrem Tora ◽  
Mesfin Shrube ◽  
Tamirat Kaba ◽  
Wasihun Seyoum
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Publication Bias ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Random Effect Model ◽  
Dairy Industry ◽  
Economic Losses ◽  
Original Research ◽  
Pooled Prevalence ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Calf Mortality

Background. Calf mortality has been a major cause of economic losses in the dairy industry in Ethiopia. The condition results in a significant drop in the number of replacing heifers and bulls for sustainable dairy business. Reports on calf mortality with a wide range of prevalence are rising in the country; however, a pooled prevalence of this condition has not been established. Thus, this systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to quantitatively estimate the pooled prevalence of calf mortality in Ethiopia. Methods. Meta-analysis was carried out to obtain the pooled prevalence of calf mortality in Ethiopia. A comprehensive literature search was carried out on PubMed, African Journals Online, CAB, Web of Science Direct, and Google Scholar. Eligible studies were selected based on predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Moderators such as the study area, breed of calf, study design, agroecology, and year of study article published were used as a milestone of data extraction. The random-effect model was used to estimate pooled prevalence. Publication bias and the variation in prevalence estimates attributed to heterogeneity were also assessed. Results. Twenty-five original research papers on the prevalence of calf mortality in various parts of Ethiopia were included. The reported prevalence of calf mortality was between 0.9% and 37%. The pooled prevalence of calf mortality in the country was 14.79%, and the pooled calf mortality estimate across studies for the entire period regarding 1991 to 2000, 2001 to 2010, 2011 to 2016, and 2017 to 2020 was 26.54%, 17.03%, 14.21%, and 11.23%, respectively. Analysis of study subgroups and location revealed significant variations in prevalence. High heterogeneity was observed in the pooled estimates and even after the subgroup meta-analysis. The funnel plots and Egger’s regression asymmetry coefficient (b = −1.0434) (95% CI = −1.49, −0.59; p value of 0.012) did suggest the presence of publication bias. There was also an indication of missing studies that could be incorporated by Duval and Tweedie’s trim and fill method where they might fall on a funnel plot and visualize them in an attempt to increase the plot’s symmetry. Analyses also suggest that calf breed, sample size, and study location are likely to be moderators of calf mortality prevalence in Ethiopia. Conclusion. This finding shows that calf mortality is widespread and could result in considerable economic losses for the dairy industry in Ethiopia. Inevitably, a significant reduction in calf mortality prevalence has been observed in recent years since 2010, but the reduction has not yet reached an economically tolerable level. Calf breed susceptibility contributed to the high prevalence. Therefore, interventions for increasing calf health and performance should be focused on minimizing calf mortality on farm and animal levels.

COVID-19 associated central nervous system manifestations, mental and neurological symptoms: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
Author(s):  
Saber Soltani ◽  
Alireza Tabibzadeh ◽  
Armin Zakeri ◽  
Amir Mohammad Zakeri ◽  
Tayebeh Latifi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Central Nervous System ◽  
Nervous System ◽  
Viral Infections ◽  
Psychological Symptoms ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Olfactory Dysfunction ◽  
Neurological Symptoms ◽  
Online Databases ◽  
Pooled Prevalence ◽  
Wide Range

Abstract The ongoing pandemic of Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has infected more than 27 million confirmed cases and 8,90,000 deaths all around the world. Verity of viral infections can infect the nervous system; these viral infections can present a wide range of manifestation. The aim of the current study was to systematically review the COVID-19 associated central nervous system manifestations, mental and neurological symptoms. For that we conducted a comprehensive systematic literature review of four online databases, including Web of Science, PubMed, Scopus and Embase. All relevant articles that reported psychiatric/psychological symptoms or disorders in COVID-19 without considering time and language restrictions were assessed. All the study procedures were performed based on the PRISMA criteria. Due to the screening, 14 studies were included. The current study result indicated that, the pooled prevalence of CNS or mental associated disorders with 95% CI was 50.68% (6.68–93.88). The most prevalence symptoms were hyposmia/anosmia/olfactory dysfunction (number of study: 10) with 36.20% (14.99–60.51). Only one study reported numbness/paresthesia and dysphonia. Pooled prevalence of numbness/paresthesia and dysphonia was 5.83% (2.17–12.25) and 2.39% (10.75–14.22). The pooled prevalence of depression and anxiety was 3.52% (2.62–4.54) and 13.92% (9.44–19.08). Our findings demonstrate that COVID-19 has a certain relation with neurological symptoms. The hypsomia, anosmia or olfactory dysfunction was most frequent symptom. Other symptoms were headache or dizziness, dysgeusia or ageusia, dysphonia and fatigue. Depression, anxiety, and confusion were less frequent symptoms.

scholarly journals Current global Status and the Epidemiology of Entamoeba gingivalis in humans: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Milad Badri ◽  
Aida Vafae Eslahi ◽  
Meysam Olfatifar
Keyword(s):  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Age Groups ◽  
Direct Methods ◽  
Diagnostic Methods ◽  
Oral Diseases ◽  
Pooled Prevalence ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
High Prevalence ◽  
Global Status

Abstract Purpose Entamoeba gingivalis (E. gingivalis) is one of the members of the wide range of oral resident pathogens in humans, particularly found in dental plaques, surfaces of gingiva or teeth, interdental spaces and carious lesions. The purpose of the current review and meta-analysis was to determine the global prevalence of E. gingivalis infection and its association with oral diseases based on published literatures. Methods Multiple English databases (PubMed, Scopus, Science Direct, Web of Science and Google Scholar) were explored for papers published until August 2020. A total of 52 studies (including 7596 participants) met the inclusion criteria. Results The overall prevalence of E. gingivalis was estimated to be 37% (95% CI: 29% - 46%). With regard to different countries, the highest and lowest pooled prevalence of E. gingivalis infection were related to Jordan with 87% (95% CI: 81% - 92%) and Portugal with 3% (95% CI: 0% - 10%), respectively. Based on WHO regions, the highest prevalence was related to the region of the Americas with 56% (95% CI: 31%-79%). The infection was most prevalent in 46-55 mean age groups [61% (95% CI: 21% - 94%)]. Among different diagnostic methods, the highest rate of the pooled prevalence was related to the molecular [53% (95% CI: 24% - 81%)] and the direct methods [36% (95% CI: 25% - 47%)], respectively. Our analyses revealed that E. gingivalis infection was associated with 4.34-fold increased risk of oral diseases (P < 0.05).Conclusion Our findings revealed a high prevalence rate of the infection among periodontal disease patients with 37% (95% CI: 20% - 57%). To conclude, it must be considered that E. gingivalis can be a risk factor associated with oral diseases and a wide range of research is needed to specify its role in the pathogenesis of these disorders.

scholarly journals One-Seventh of Patients with COVID-19 Had Olfactory and Gustatory Abnormalities as Their Initial Symptoms: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Life ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (9) ◽  
pp. 158 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hsin Chi ◽  
Nan-Chang Chiu ◽  
Chun-Chih Peng ◽  
Chao-Hsu Lin ◽  
Yu-Lin Tai ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Odds Ratio ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Diagnostic Testing ◽  
Clinical Manifestations ◽  
Pooled Prevalence ◽  
Initial Symptoms ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Cardinal Symptoms ◽  
Negative Controls

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients exhibited protean clinical manifestations. Olfactory and gustatory abnormalities (anosmia and ageusia) were observed in COVID-19 patients, but the reported prevalence varied. In this systematic review, the prevalence of olfactory and gustatory abnormalities (OGA) was evaluated in laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 patients. On 8 May 2020, 14,506 articles were screened, while 12 of them were enrolled. A total of 1739 COVID-19 patients were analyzed, with a wide range of prevalence observed (5.6–94%). The pooled prevalence was 48.5% with high heterogeneity (I2, 98.8%; p < 0.0001). In total, 15.5% had OGA as their first symptom (I2, 22.6%; p = 0.27) among the patients analyzed. Contradictory to COVID-19 negative controls, patients with COVID-19 had a higher risk of OGA (odds ratio, 5.3; I2, 66.5%; p = 0.03). In conclusion, approximately half of COVID-19 patients had OGA, and one-seventh of them had OGA as their initial symptoms. OGA were cardinal symptoms of COVID-19, which may serve as clues for early diagnosis. Diagnostic testing for SARS-CoV-2 was suggested in patients with OGA during the COVID-19 pandemic to ensure timely diagnosis and appropriate quarantine.

The Orchard Plot: Cultivating a Forest Plot for Use in Ecology, Evolution and Beyond

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shinichi Nakagawa ◽  
Malgorzata Lagisz ◽  
Rose E O'Dea ◽  
Joanna Rutkowska ◽  
Yefeng Yang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Meta Analysis ◽  
R Package ◽  
Effect Sizes ◽  
Forest Plot ◽  
Point Estimates ◽  
Aggregate Effect ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Meta Analyses ◽  
Heterogeneous Effect ◽  
Intuitive Interpretation

‘Classic’ forest plots show the effect sizes from individual studies and the aggregate effect from a meta-analysis. However, in ecology and evolution meta-analyses routinely contain over 100 effect sizes, making the classic forest plot of limited use. We surveyed 102 meta-analyses in ecology and evolution, finding that only 11% use the classic forest plot. Instead, most used a ‘forest-like plot’, showing point estimates (with 95% confidence intervals; CIs) from a series of subgroups or categories in a meta-regression. We propose a modification of the forest-like plot, which we name the ‘orchard plot’. Orchard plots, in addition to showing overall mean effects and CIs from meta-analyses/regressions, also includes 95% prediction intervals (PIs), and the individual effect sizes scaled by their precision. The PI allows the user and reader to see the range in which an effect size from a future study may be expected to fall. The PI, therefore, provides an intuitive interpretation of any heterogeneity in the data. Supplementing the PI, the inclusion of underlying effect sizes also allows the user to see any influential or outlying effect sizes. We showcase the orchard plot with example datasets from ecology and evolution, using the R package, orchard, including several functions for visualizing meta-analytic data using forest-plot derivatives. We consider the orchard plot as a variant on the classic forest plot, cultivated to the needs of meta-analysts in ecology and evolution. Hopefully, the orchard plot will prove fruitful for visualizing large collections of heterogeneous effect sizes regardless of the field of study.

scholarly journals Pooled estimate of vitamin D deficiency among pregnant women in India: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 40 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Angeline Jeyakumar ◽  
Vidhya Shinde ◽  
Reshma Ravindran
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Vitamin D ◽  
Pregnant Women ◽  
Vitamin D Deficiency ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Health Concern ◽  
Study Quality ◽  
Care Services ◽  
Pooled Prevalence ◽  
Women In India

Abstract Background Vitamin D deficiency among pregnant women is a public health concern globally. In India, individual studies report high prevalence. However, lack of national data masks the true burden. This work determined the pooled prevalence of vitamin D deficiency among pregnant women in India through a systematic review of literature and meta-analysis. Methods Three different search engines yielded 15 eligible articles. Study quality was assessed by 10 different criteria and summary of study quality was categorized as per Cochrane standards. Meta-analysis was performed to estimate pooled prevalence of vitamin D deficiency among healthy pregnant women and heterogeneity among selected studies. A sample of n = 4088 was used to study the pooled prevalence among pregnant women. Results The random effects combined estimate was 32.35% (95% CI, (12.58–117.48). High heterogeneity (tau2 = 0.39, I2 = 100%) and high risk of bias was observed among the selected studies. The test for overall effect was observed to be z = 2.54(P = 0.01). Conclusion Pooled estimate > 30% emphasizes the need for screening through antenatal care services and initiate preventive measures to address the deficiency.

scholarly journals Dyslipidaemia and mortality in COVID-19 patients - a meta-analysis

QJM ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marco Zuin ◽  
Gianluca Rigatelli ◽  
Claudio Bilato ◽  
Carlo Cervellati ◽  
Giovanni Zuliani ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Random Effects ◽  
Mortality Risk ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Random Effect ◽  
Final Analysis ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Random Effects Models ◽  
Pooled Prevalence ◽  
Statistical Heterogeneity ◽  
Trim And Fill

Abstract Objective The prevalence and prognostic implications of pre-existing dyslipidaemia in patients infected by the SARS-CoV-2 remain unclear. To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of prevalence and mortality risk in COVID-19 patients with pre-existing dyslipidaemia. Methods Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines were followed in abstracting data and assessing validity. We searched MEDLINE and Scopus to locate all the articles published up to January 31, 2021, reporting data on dyslipidaemia among COVID-19 survivors and non-survivors. The pooled prevalence of dyslipidaemia was calculated using a random effects model and presenting the related 95% confidence interval (CI), while the mortality risk was estimated using the Mantel-Haenszel random effects models with odds ratio (OR) and related 95% CI. Statistical heterogeneity was measured using the Higgins I2 statistic. Results Eighteen studies, enrolling 74.132 COVID-19 patients [mean age 70.6 years], met the inclusion criteria and were included in the final analysis. The pooled prevalence of dyslipidaemia was 17.5% of cases (95% CI: 12.3-24.3%, p &lt; 0.0001), with high heterogeneity (I2=98.7%). Pre-existing dyslipidaemia was significantly associated with higher risk of short-term death (OR: 1.69, 95% CI: 1.19-2.41, p = 0.003), with high heterogeneity (I2=88.7%). Due to publication bias, according to the Trim-and-Fill method, the corrected random-effect ORs resulted 1.61, 95% CI 1.13-2.28, p &lt; 0.0001 (one studies trimmed). Conclusions Dyslipidaemia represents a major comorbidity in about 18% of COVID-19 patients but it is associated with a 60% increase of short-term mortality risk.

scholarly journals Recent smell loss is the best predictor of COVID-19 among individuals with recent respiratory symptoms

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard C Gerkin ◽  
Kathrin Ohla ◽  
Maria G Veldhuizen ◽  
Paule V Joseph ◽  
Christine E Kelly ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Symptom Onset ◽  
Respiratory Symptom ◽  
Respiratory Illness ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Logistic Regression Models ◽  
Olfactory Loss ◽  
Visual Analog Scales ◽  
Cardinal Symptoms ◽  
Smell Loss

Abstract In a preregistered, cross-sectional study we investigated whether olfactory loss is a reliable predictor of COVID-19 using a crowdsourced questionnaire in 23 languages to assess symptoms in individuals self-reporting recent respiratory illness. We quantified changes in chemosensory abilities during the course of the respiratory illness using 0-100 visual analog scales (VAS) for participants reporting a positive (C19+; n=4148) or negative (C19-; n=546) COVID-19 laboratory test outcome. Logistic regression models identified univariate and multivariate predictors of COVID-19 status and post-COVID-19 olfactory recovery. Both C19+ and C19- groups exhibited smell loss, but it was significantly larger in C19+ participants (mean±SD, C19+: -82.5±27.2 points; C19-: -59.8±37.7). Smell loss during illness was the best predictor of COVID-19 in both univariate and multivariate models (ROC AUC=0.72). Additional variables provide negligible model improvement. VAS ratings of smell loss were more predictive than binary chemosensory yes/no-questions or other cardinal symptoms (e.g., fever). Olfactory recovery within 40 days of respiratory symptom onset was reported for ~50% of participants and was best predicted by time since respiratory symptom onset. We find that quantified smell loss is the best predictor of COVID-19 amongst those with symptoms of respiratory illness. To aid clinicians and contact tracers in identifying individuals with a high likelihood of having COVID-19, we propose a novel 0-10 scale to screen for recent olfactory loss, the ODoR-19. We find that numeric ratings ≤2 indicate high odds of symptomatic COVID-19 (4&lt;OR&lt;10). Once independently validated, this tool could be deployed when viral lab tests are impractical or unavailable.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document