Population-based prevalence surveys during the COVID-19 pandemic: a systematic review

AbstractPopulation-based prevalence surveys of COVID-19 contribute to establish the burden and epidemiology of infection, the role of asymptomatic and mild infections in transmission, and allow more precise decisions about reopen policies. We performed a systematic review to evaluate qualitative aspects of these studies, their reliability, and biases. The available data described 37 surveys from 19 countries, mostly from Europe and America and using antibody testing. They reached highly heterogeneous sample sizes and prevalence estimates. Disproportional prevalence was observed in minority communities. Important risk of bias was detected in four domains: sample size, data analysis with sufficient coverage, measurements in standard way, and response rate. The correspondence analysis showed few consistent patterns for high risk of bias. Intermediate risk of bias was related to American and European studies, blood samples and prevalence >1%. Low risk of bias was related to Asian studies, RT-PCR tests and prevalence <1%.One sentence summaryPopulation-based prevalence surveys of COVID-19 until September 2020 were mostly conducted in Europe and Americas, used antibody testing, and had important risks of bias.

Download Full-text

A systematic review and meta-analysis of the prevalence of left ventricular non-compaction in adults

European Heart Journal ◽

10.1093/eurheartj/ehz317 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 41 (14) ◽

pp. 1428-1436 ◽

Cited By ~ 23

Author(s):

Samantha B Ross ◽

Katherine Jones ◽

Bianca Blanch ◽

Rajesh Puranik ◽

Kevin McGeechan ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Left Ventricular ◽

Risk Of Bias ◽

Physiological Adaptation ◽

Pooled Prevalence ◽

Prevalence Estimates ◽

Pathological Disease ◽

Cmr Imaging

Abstract Aims To assess the reported prevalence of left ventricular non-compaction (LVNC) in different adult cohorts, taking in to consideration the role of diagnostic criteria and imaging modalities used. Methods and results A systematic review and meta-analysis of studies reporting LVNC prevalence in adults. Studies were sourced from Pre-Medline, Medline, and Embase and assessed for eligibility according to inclusion criteria. Eligible studies provided a prevalence of LVNC in adult populations (≥12 years). Studies were assessed, and data extracted by two independent reviewers. Fifty-nine eligible studies documenting LVNC in 67 unique cohorts were included. The majority of studies were assessed as moderate or high risk of bias. The pooled prevalence estimates for LVNC were consistently higher amongst cohorts diagnosed on cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging (14.79%, n = 26; I2 = 99.45%) compared with echocardiogram (1.28%, n = 36; I2 = 98.17%). This finding was unchanged when analysis was restricted to studies at low or moderate risk of bias. The prevalence of LVNC varied between disease and population representative cohorts. Athletic cohorts demonstrated high pooled prevalence estimates on echocardiogram (3.16%, n = 5; I2 = 97.37%) and CMR imaging (27.29%, n = 2). Conclusion Left ventricular non-compaction in adult populations is a poorly defined entity which likely encompasses both physiological adaptation and pathological disease. There is a higher prevalence with the introduction of newer imaging technologies, specifically CMR imaging, which identify LVNC changes more readily. The clinical significance of these findings remains unclear; however, there is significant potential for overdiagnosis, overtreatment, and unnecessary follow-up.

Download Full-text

Trigger factors for familial hemiplegic migraine

Cephalalgia ◽

10.1177/0333102411415878 ◽

2011 ◽

Vol 31 (12) ◽

pp. 1274-1281 ◽

Cited By ~ 22

Author(s):

Jakob Møller Hansen ◽

Anne Werner Hauge ◽

Messoud Ashina ◽

Jes Olesen

Keyword(s):

Migraine With Aura ◽

Response Rate ◽

Bright Light ◽

Familial Hemiplegic Migraine ◽

Population Based ◽

Trigger Factor ◽

Trigger Factors ◽

Hemiplegic Migraine

Objective: The aim was to identify and describe migraine trigger factors in patients with familial hemiplegic migraine (FHM) from a population-based sample. Methods: 127 FHM patients were sent a questionnaire listing 16 trigger factors. Distinction was made between attacks of hemiplegic migraine (HM) and migraine with aura (MA) or without aura (MO) within each patient. Results: The response rate was 59% (75/127) of whom 57 (76%) had current HM attacks. Sixty-three per cent (47/75) reported at least one factor triggering HM, and 36% (27/75) reported at least one factor that often or always caused HM. Twenty per cent (15/75) reported only HM, whereas FHM in combinations with MA and MO were reported by 80% (60/75). Stress (with attacks either following or during the stress), bright light, intense emotional influences and sleeping too much or too little were the trigger factors mentioned by most. Conclusion: Many FHM patients report trigger factors and one-third reported at least one trigger factor often or always triggering FHM. The typical triggers are the same as for MA. Patients should be educated to avoid these factors. The role of trigger factors in the onset of new or first attacks of FHM remains unknown.

Download Full-text

Bereavement care for ethnic minority communities: A systematic review of access to, models of, outcomes from, and satisfaction with, service provision

10.1101/2021.02.13.21251679 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Catriona Rachel Mayland ◽

Richard A. Powell ◽

Gemma Clarke ◽

Bassey Ebenso ◽

Matthew J Allsop

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Ethnic Minority ◽

Service Provision ◽

Models Of Care ◽

Cochrane Library ◽

Minority Populations ◽

Minority Communities ◽

Ethnic Minority Populations ◽

Bereavement Care

AbstractObjectivesTo review and synthesize the existing evidence on bereavement care, within the United Kingdom (UK), for ethnic minority communities in terms of barriers and facilitators to access; models of care; outcomes from, and satisfaction with, service provision.DesignA systematic review adopting a framework synthesis approach was conducted. An electronic search of the literature was undertaken in MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, Social Work Abstract and CINAHL via EBSCO, Global Health, Cochrane library, the Trip database and ProQuest between 2000 and 2020. Search terms included bereavement care, ethnic minority populations and the UK setting.ResultsFrom 3,185 initial records, following screening for eligibility, and full-text review of 164 articles, seven studies were identified. There was no research literature outlining the role of family, friends and existing networks; and a real absence of evidence about outcomes and levels of satisfaction for those from an ethnic minority background who receive bereavement care. From the limited literature, the overarching theme for barriers to bereavement care was ‘unfamiliarity and irregularities’. Four identified subthemes were ‘lack of awareness’; ‘variability in support’; ‘type and format of support’; and ‘culturally specific beliefs’. The overarching theme for facilitators for bereavement care was ‘accessibility’ with the two subthemes being ‘readily available information’ and ‘inclusive approaches’. Three studies reported on examples of different models of care provision.ConclusionsThis review reveals a stark lack of evidence about bereavement care for ethnic minority populations. In particular, understanding more about the role of family, friends and existing support systems, alongside outcomes and satisfaction will begin to develop the evidence base underpinning current provision. Direct user-representation through proactive engagement and co-design approaches may begin to determine the most appropriate models and format of bereavement care for ethnic minority communities to inform service design and delivery.

Download Full-text

External validity of prevalence estimates from the national maternity surveys in England: The impact of response rate

PLoS ONE ◽

10.1371/journal.pone.0242815 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 15 (11) ◽

pp. e0242815

Author(s):

Sian Harrison ◽

Fiona Alderdice ◽

Maria A. Quigley

Keyword(s):

Preterm Birth ◽

Caesarean Section ◽

External Validity ◽

Low Birthweight ◽

Response Rate ◽

Response Rates ◽

Population Based ◽

Breastfeeding Initiation ◽

Prevalence Estimates ◽

Survey Estimates

Background Prevalence estimates from surveys with low response rates are prone to non-response bias if respondents and non-respondents differ on the outcome of interest. This study assessed the external validity of prevalence estimates of selected maternity indicators from four national maternity surveys in England which had similar survey methodology but different response rates. Methods A secondary analysis was conducted using data from the national maternity surveys in 2006 (response rate = 63%), 2010 (response rate = 54%), 2014 (response rate = 47%) and 2018 (response rate = 29%). Unweighted and (for the 2014 and 2018 surveys) weighted survey prevalence estimates (with 95%CIs) of caesarean section, preterm birth, low birthweight and breastfeeding initiation were validated against population-based estimates from routine data. Results The external validity of the survey estimates varied across surveys and by indicator. For caesarean section, the 95%CIs for the unweighted survey estimates included the population-based estimates for all surveys. For preterm birth and low birthweight, the 95%CIs for the unweighted survey estimates did not include the population-based estimates for the 2006 and 2010 surveys (or the 2014 survey for preterm birth). For breastfeeding initiation, the 95%CIs for the unweighted survey estimates did not include the population-based estimates for any survey. For all indicators, the effect of weighting (on the 2014 and 2018 survey estimates) was mostly a shift towards the population-based estimates, yet the 95%CIs for the weighted survey estimates of breastfeeding initiation did not include the population-based estimates. Conclusion There were no clear differences in the external validity of prevalence estimates according to survey response rate suggesting that prevalence estimates may still be valid even when survey response rates are low. The survey estimates tended to become closer to the population-based estimates when weights were applied, yet the effect was insufficient for breastfeeding initiation estimates.

Download Full-text

Prevalence of multimorbid degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis with knee and/or hip osteoarthritis: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis

10.21203/rs.3.rs-20819/v2 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

James J. Young ◽

Jan Hartvigsen ◽

Rikke K. Jensen ◽

Ewa M. Roos ◽

Carlo Ammendolia ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Data Extraction ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Hip Osteoarthritis ◽

Healthcare Setting ◽

Risk Of Bias ◽

Sample Population ◽

Case Definitions ◽

Prevalence Estimates ◽

The Impact

Abstract Background: Lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) and knee and hip osteoarthritis (OA) are prevalent conditions in the aging population and published literature suggests they share many symptoms and often are present at the same time in patients. However, no prevalence estimates of multimorbid LSS and knee and/or hip OA are currently available. The primary objective of this systematic review is therefore to estimate the prevalence of multimorbid LSS with knee and/or hip OA using radiological, clinical, and combined case definitions. Methods: This systematic review protocol has been designed according to the guidelines from the Cochrane Collaboration and are reported according the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis Protocols. A comprehensive search will be performed in the following databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, and CINAHL. Forward citation tracking will be performed in Web of Science. No restriction for publication data and language will be applied in the literature search, but only articles in English will be included. The search strategy will include the following domains: LSS, knee OA, and hip OA. Retrieved citations will be screened by two authors independently. Disagreements will be discussed until consensus, and a third reviewer will be consulted if consensus cannot be reached. Data extraction and assessment of methodological quality will be done by two authors independently, using a standardized data extraction form and a modified Risk of Bias Tool for Prevalence studies. Meta-analysis estimating prevalence with 95% CI will be performed using a random effects model. Meta-regression analyses will be performed to investigate the impact of the following covariates: LSS clinical presentations, sample population, healthcare setting, risk of bias, and other patient characteristics on prevalence estimates for multimorbid LSS and knee and/or hip OA.Discussion: The results of this review will provide the first estimates of the prevalence of multimorbid LSS and hip and knee OA based on various case definitions. The impact of covariates such as LSS clinical presentations, sample population, healthcare setting, risk of bias, and patient characteristics on prevalence estimates will also be presented. Systematic review registration: Submitted to PROSPERO, awaiting registration

Download Full-text

Prevalence of chronic pain after spinal cord injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine ◽

10.1136/rapm-2020-101960 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. rapm-2020-101960

Author(s):

Christine Hunt ◽

Rajat Moman ◽

Ashley Peterson ◽

Rachel Wilson ◽

Stephen Covington ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Spinal Cord ◽

Spinal Cord Injury ◽

Chronic Pain ◽

Classification System ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Risk Of Bias ◽

Pooled Prevalence ◽

Cord Injury ◽

Prevalence Estimates

BackgroundThe reported prevalence of chronic pain after spinal cord injury (SCI) varies widely due, in part, to differences in the taxonomy of chronic pain. A widely used classification system is available to describe subcategories of chronic pain in SCI, but the prevalence of chronic pain in SCI based on this system is unknown.ObjectiveThe primary objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to determine the prevalence of chronic pain after SCI based on the International Spinal Cord Injury Pain (ISCIP) classification system.Evidence reviewA comprehensive search of databases from January 1980 to August 2019 was conducted. The risk of bias was assessed using a modified tool developed for uncontrolled studies. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach was used to assess certainty in prevalence estimates.FindingsA total of 1305 records were screened, and 37 studies met inclusion criteria. The pooled prevalence of overall chronic pain was 68% (95% CI 63% to 73%). The pooled prevalence of neuropathic pain in 13 studies was 58% (95% CI 49% to 68%); the pooled prevalence of musculoskeletal pain in 11 studies was 56% (95% CI 41% to 70%); the pooled prevalence of visceral pain in 8 studies was 20% (95% CI 11% to 29%) and the pooled prevalence of nociceptive pain in 2 studies was 45% (95% CI 13% to 78%). Meta-regression of risk of bias (p=0.20), traumatic versus non-traumatic etiology of injury (p=0.59), and studies where pain was a primary outcome (p=0.32) demonstrated that these factors were not significant moderators of heterogeneity. Certainty in prevalence estimates was judged to be low due to unexplained heterogeneity.ConclusionThis systematic review and meta-analysis extends the findings of previous studies by reporting the prevalence of chronic pain after SCI based on the ISCIP classification system, thereby reducing clinical heterogeneity in the reporting of pain prevalence related to SCI.

Download Full-text

At what times during infection is SARS-CoV-2 detectable and no longer detectable using RT-PCR-based tests? A systematic review of individual participant data

BMC Medicine ◽

10.1186/s12916-020-01810-8 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 18 (1) ◽

Author(s):

Sue Mallett ◽

A. Joy Allen ◽

Sara Graziadio ◽

Stuart A. Taylor ◽

Naomi S. Sakai ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Respiratory Tract ◽

Symptom Onset ◽

Virus Detection ◽

Risk Of Bias ◽

Individual Participant Data ◽

Upper Respiratory Tract ◽

Test Results ◽

Rt Pcr ◽

Individual Participant

Abstract Background Tests for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) viral ribonucleic acid (RNA) using reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) are pivotal to detecting current coronavirus disease (COVID-19) and duration of detectable virus indicating potential for infectivity. Methods We conducted an individual participant data (IPD) systematic review of longitudinal studies of RT-PCR test results in symptomatic SARS-CoV-2. We searched PubMed, LitCOVID, medRxiv, and COVID-19 Living Evidence databases. We assessed risk of bias using a QUADAS-2 adaptation. Outcomes were the percentage of positive test results by time and the duration of detectable virus, by anatomical sampling sites. Results Of 5078 studies screened, we included 32 studies with 1023 SARS-CoV-2 infected participants and 1619 test results, from − 6 to 66 days post-symptom onset and hospitalisation. The highest percentage virus detection was from nasopharyngeal sampling between 0 and 4 days post-symptom onset at 89% (95% confidence interval (CI) 83 to 93) dropping to 54% (95% CI 47 to 61) after 10 to 14 days. On average, duration of detectable virus was longer with lower respiratory tract (LRT) sampling than upper respiratory tract (URT). Duration of faecal and respiratory tract virus detection varied greatly within individual participants. In some participants, virus was still detectable at 46 days post-symptom onset. Conclusions RT-PCR misses detection of people with SARS-CoV-2 infection; early sampling minimises false negative diagnoses. Beyond 10 days post-symptom onset, lower RT or faecal testing may be preferred sampling sites. The included studies are open to substantial risk of bias, so the positivity rates are probably overestimated.

Download Full-text

The role of the immune system in tendon healing: a systematic review

British Medical Bulletin ◽

10.1093/bmb/ldz040 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 133 (1) ◽

pp. 49-64 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Emanuele Chisari ◽

Laura Rehak ◽

Wasim S Khan ◽

Nicola Maffulli

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Immune Response ◽

Immune System ◽

Mast Cells ◽

Immune Cells ◽

Tendon Healing ◽

Risk Of Bias ◽

Cochrane Library ◽

Healing Response

Abstract Introduction The role of the immune system in tendon healing relies on polymorphonucleocytes, mast cells, macrophages and lymphocytes, the ‘immune cells’ and their cytokine production. This systematic review reports how the immune system affects tendon healing. Sources of data We registered our protocol (registration number: CRD42019141838). After searching PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library databases, we included studies of any level of evidence published in peer-reviewed journals reporting clinical or preclinical results. The PRISMA guidelines were applied, and risk of bias and the methodological quality of the included studies were assessed. We excluded all the articles with high risk of bias and/or low quality after the assessment. We included 62 articles assessed as medium or high quality. Areas of agreement Macrophages are major actors in the promotion of proper wound healing as well as the resolution of inflammation in response to pathogenic challenge or tissue damage. The immune cells secrete cytokines involving both pro-inflammatory and anti-inflammatory factors which could affect both healing and macrophage polarization. Areas of controversy The role of lymphocytes, mast cells and polymorphonucleocytes is still inconclusive. Growing points The immune system is a major actor in the complex mechanism behind the healing response occurring in tendons after an injury. A dysregulation of the immune response can ultimately lead to a failed healing response. Areas timely for developing research Further studies are needed to shed light on therapeutic targets to improve tendon healing and in managing new way to balance immune response.

Download Full-text

Mapping the preclinical to clinical evidence and development trajectory of the oncolytic virus talimogene laherparepvec (T-VEC): a systematic review

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2019-029475 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 9 (12) ◽

pp. e029475 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Manoj Lalu ◽

Garvin J Leung ◽

Yuan Yi Dong ◽

Joshua Montroy ◽

Claire Butler ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Clinical Studies ◽

Clinical Evidence ◽

Response Rate ◽

Complete Response Rate ◽

Complete Response ◽

Risk Of Bias ◽

Preclinical Studies ◽

Talimogene Laherparepvec ◽

Development Trajectory

ObjectiveThis study aimed to conduct a systematic review of preclinical and clinical evidence to chart the successful trajectory of talimogene laherparepvec (T-VEC) from the bench to the clinic.DesignThis study was a systematic review. The primary outcome of interest was the efficacy of treatment, determined by complete response. Abstract and full-text selection as well as data extraction were done by two independent reviewers. The Cochrane risk of bias tool was used to assess the risk of bias in studies.SettingEmbase, Embase Classic and OvidMedline were searched from inception until May 2016 to assess its development trajectory to approval in 2015.ParticipantsPreclinical and clinical controlled comparison studies, as well as observational studies.InterventionsT-VEC for the treatment of any malignancy.Results8852 records were screened and five preclinical (n=150 animals) and seven clinical studies (n=589 patients) were included. We saw large decreases in T-VEC’s efficacy as studies moved from the laboratory to patients, and as studies became more methodologically rigorous. Preclinical studies reported complete regression rates up to 100% for injected tumours and 80% for contralateral tumours, while the highest degree of efficacy seen in the clinical setting was a 24% complete response rate, with one study experiencing a complete response rate of 0%. We were unable to reliably assess safety due to the lack of reporting, as well as the heterogeneity seen in adverse event definitions. All preclinical studies had high or unclear risk of bias, and all clinical studies were at a high risk of bias in at least one domain.ConclusionsOur findings illustrate that even successful biotherapeutics may not demonstrate a clear translational road map. This emphasises the need to consider increasing rigour and transparency along the translational pathway.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42016043541.

Download Full-text

Role of personality disorder in randomised controlled trials of pharmacological interventions for adults with mood disorders: a protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2018-025145 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 9 (4) ◽

pp. e025145

Author(s):

Bianca E Kavanagh ◽

Sharon Lee Brennan-Olsen ◽

Alyna Turner ◽

Olivia M Dean ◽

Michael Berk ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Personality Disorder ◽

Mood Disorders ◽

Randomised Controlled Trials ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Risk Of Bias ◽

Controlled Trials ◽

Pharmacological Interventions ◽

Randomised Controlled

IntroductionRemission rates for mood disorders, including depressive and bipolar disorders, remain relatively low despite available treatments, and many patients fail to respond adequately to these interventions. Evidence suggests that personality disorder may play a role in poor outcomes. Although personality disorders are common in patients with mood disorders, it remains unknown whether personality disorder affects treatment outcomes in mood disorders. We aim to review currently available evidence regarding the role of personality disorder on pharmacological interventions in randomised controlled trials for adults with mood disorders.Methods and analysisA systematic search of Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Clinical Trials (CENTRAL) via cochranelibrary.com, PubMed via PubMed, EMBASE via embase.com, PsycINFO via Ebsco and CINAHL Complete via Ebsco databases will be conducted to identify randomised controlled trials that have investigated pharmacological interventions in participants aged 18 years or older for mood disorders (ie, depressive disorders and bipolar spectrum disorders) and have also included assessment of personality disorder. One reviewer will screen studies against the predetermined eligibility criteria, and a second reviewer will confirm eligible studies. Data will be extracted by two independent reviewers. Methodological quality and risk of bias will be assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. A systematic review, and if sufficient evidence is identified, a meta-analysis will be completed. Meta-analysis will be conducted using the standardised mean difference approach and reported with 95% CIs. A random effects model will be employed and statistical heterogeneity will be evaluated using the I2 statistic. Prespecified subgroup analyses will be completed.Ethics and disseminationAs this systematic review will use published data, ethics permission will not be required. The outcomes of this systematic review will be published in a relevant scientific journal and presented at a research conference.Trial registration numberCRD42018089279.

Download Full-text