scholarly journals Global Prevalence of Post-Acute Sequelae of COVID-19 (PASC) or Long COVID: A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chen Chen ◽  
Spencer R. Haupert ◽  
Lauren Zimmermann ◽  
Xu Shi ◽  
Lars G. Fritsche ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
North America ◽  
Health Effects ◽  
Acute Phase ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Interval Estimate ◽  
Index Test ◽  
Healthcare Needs ◽  
Prevalence Estimates

Importance As SARS-CoV-2 pervades worldwide, considerable focus has been placed on the longer lasting health effects of the virus on the human host and on the anticipated healthcare needs. Objective The primary aim of this study is to examine the prevalence of post-acute sequelae of COVID-19 (PASC), commonly known as long COVID, across the world and to assess geographic heterogeneities through a systematic review and meta-analysis. A second aim is to provide prevalence estimates for individual symptoms that have been commonly reported as PASC, based on the existing literature. Data Sources PubMed, Embase, and iSearch for preprints from medRxiv, bioRxiv, SSRN, and others, were searched on July 5, 2021 with verification extending to August 12, 2021. Study Selection Studies written in English that consider PASC (indexed as ailments persisting at least 28 days after diagnosis or recovery for SARS-CoV-2 infection) and that examine corresponding prevalence, risk factors, duration, or associated symptoms were included. A total of 40 studies were included with 9 from North America, 1 from South America, 17 from Europe, 11 from Asia, and 2 from other regions. Data Extraction and Synthesis Data extraction was performed and separately cross-validated on the following data elements: title, journal, authors, date of publication, outcomes, and characteristics related to the study sample and study design. Using a random effects framework for meta-analysis with DerSimonian-Laird pooled inverse-variance weighted estimator, we provide an interval estimate of PASC prevalence, globally, and across regions. This meta-analysis considers variation in PASC prevalence by hospitalization status during the acute phase of infection, duration of symptoms, and specific symptom categories. Main Outcomes and Measures Prevalence of PASC worldwide and stratified by regions. Results Global estimated pooled PASC prevalence derived from the estimates presented in 29 studies was 0.43 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.35, 0.63), with a higher pooled PASC prevalence estimate of 0.57 (95% CI: 0.45, 0.68), among those hospitalized during the acute phase of infection. Females were estimated to have higher pooled PASC prevalence than males (0.49 [95% CI: 0.35, 0.63] versus 0.37 [95% CI: 0.24, 0.51], respectively). Regional pooled PASC prevalence estimates in descending order were 0.49 (95% CI: 0.21, 0.42) for Asia, 0.44 (95% CI: 0.30, 0.59) for Europe, and 0.30 (95% CI: 0.32, 0.66) for North America. Global pooled PASC prevalence for 30, 60, 90, and 120 days after index test positive date were estimated to be 0.36 (95% CI: 0.25, 0.48), 0.24 (95% CI: 0.13, 0.39), 0.29 (95% CI: 0.12, 0.57) and 0.51 (95% CI: 0.42, 0.59), respectively. Among commonly reported PASC symptoms, fatigue and dyspnea were reported most frequently, with a prevalence of 0.23 (95% CI: 0.13, 0.38) and 0.13 (95% CI: 0.09, 0.19), respectively. Conclusions and Relevance The findings of this meta-analysis suggest that, worldwide, PASC comprises a significant fraction (0.43 [95% CI: 0.35, 0.63]) of COVID-19 tested positive cases and more than half of hospitalized COVID-19 cases, based on available literature as of August 12, 2021. Geographic differences appear to exist, as lowest to highest PASC prevalence is observed for North America (0.30 [95% CI: 0.32, 0.66]) to Asia (0.49 [95% CI: 0.21, 0.42]). The case-mix across studies, in terms of COVID-19 severity during the acute phase of infection and variation in the clinical definition of PASC, may explain some of these differences. Nonetheless, the health effects of COVID-19 appear to be prolonged and can exert marked stress on the healthcare system, with 237M reported COVID-19 cases worldwide as of October 12, 2021.

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

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

scholarly journals The Prevalence and Incidence of Dementia Due to Alzheimer’s Disease: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2016 ◽  
Vol 43 (S1) ◽  
pp. S51-S82 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kirsten M. Fiest ◽  
Jodie I. Roberts ◽  
Colleen J. Maxwell ◽  
David B. Hogan ◽  
Eric E. Smith ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Alzheimer’S Disease ◽  
Alzheimer's Disease ◽  
Diagnostic Criteria ◽  
Full Text ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Community Settings ◽  
Healthcare Needs ◽  
The Impact

AbstractBackgroundUpdated information on the epidemiology of dementia due to Alzheimer’s disease (AD) is needed to ensure that adequate resources are available to meet current and future healthcare needs. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the incidence and prevalence of AD.MethodsThe MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were searched from 1985 to 2012, as well as the reference lists of selected articles. Included articles had to provide an original population-based estimate for the incidence and/or prevalence of AD. Two individuals independently performed abstract and full-text reviews, data extraction and quality assessments. Random-effects models were employed to generate pooled estimates stratified by age, sex, diagnostic criteria, location (i.e., continent) and time (i.e., when the study was done).ResultsOf 16,066 abstracts screened, 707 articles were selected for full-text review. A total of 119 studies met the inclusion criteria. In community settings, the overall point prevalence of dementia due to AD among individuals 60+ was 40.2 per 1000 persons (CI95%: 29.1-55.6), and pooled annual period prevalence was 30.4 per 1000 persons (CI95%: 15.6-59.1). In community settings, the overall pooled annual incidence proportion of dementia due to AD among individuals 60+ was 34.1 per 1000 persons (CI95%: 16.4-70.9), and the incidence rate was 15.8 per 1000 person-years (CI95%: 12.9-19.4). Estimates varied significantly with age, diagnostic criteria used and location (i.e., continent).ConclusionsThe burden of AD dementia is substantial. Significant gaps in our understanding of its epidemiology were identified, even in a high-income country such as Canada. Future studies should assess the impact of using such newer clinical diagnostic criteria for AD dementia such as those of the National Institute on Aging–Alzheimer’s Association and/or incorporate validated biomarkers to confirm the presence of Alzheimer pathology to produce more precise estimates of the global burden of AD.

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

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
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 is reported according to 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 date 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 risk of bias assessment 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 PROSPERO, awaiting registration

scholarly journals Health effects of desert dust and sand storms: a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol

BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (7) ◽  
pp. e029876 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aurelio Tobias ◽  
Angeliki Karanasiou ◽  
Fulvio Amato ◽  
Marta Roqué ◽  
Xavier Querol
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Human Health ◽  
Health Effects ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Dust Particles ◽  
Primary Data ◽  
Desert Dust ◽  
Form Quality ◽  
Meta Analyses

IntroductionDesert dust concentrations raise concerns about adverse effects on human health. During the last decade, special attention has been given to mineral dust particles from desert dust and sand storms. However, evidence from previous reviews reported inconclusive results on their health effects and the biological mechanism remains unclear. We aim to systematically synthesise evidence on the health effects of desert dust and sand storms accounting for the relevant desert dust patterns from source areas and emissions, transport and composition.Methods an analysisWe will conduct a systematic review that investigated the health effects of desert dust and sand storms in any population. The search will be performed for any eligible studies from previous reviews and selected electronic databases until 2018. Study selection and reporting will follow the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Data from individual studies will be extracted using a standardised data extraction form. Quality of the studies will be assessed using a risk of bias tool for environmental exposures developed by experts convened by the WHO. A meta-analysis will be performed by calculating the appropriate effect measures of association for binary and continuous outcomes from individual studies. Subgroup analyses will be performed by geographical areas to account for desert dust patterns.Ethics and disseminationNo primary data will be collected. For this reason, no formal ethical approval is required. This systematic review will help to fill the research gaps in the knowledge of desert dust on human health. The results will be disseminated through a WHO peer-reviewed publication and a conference presentation.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42018091809

scholarly journals Prevalence and risk factors of epiretinal membranes: a systematic review and meta-analysis of population-based studies

BMJ Open ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 7 (9) ◽  
pp. e014644 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wei Xiao ◽  
Xiaoyun Chen ◽  
William Yan ◽  
Zhuoting Zhu ◽  
Mingguang He
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
English Language ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Population Based ◽  
Epiretinal Membranes ◽  
Large Variability ◽  
Prevalence Estimates ◽  
Potential Risk Factors

ObjectiveThis study was to aggregate the prevalence and risks of epiretinal membranes (ERMs) and determine the possible causes of the varied estimates.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis.Data sourcesThe search strategy was designed prospectively. We searched PubMed, Embase and Web of Science databases from inception to July 2016. Reference lists of the included literatures were reviewed as well.Study selectionSurveys published in English language from any population were included if they had a population-based design and reported the prevalence of ERM from retinal photography with or without optical coherence tomography. Eligibility and quality evaluation was conducted independently by two investigators.Data extractionThe literature search generated 2144 records, and 13 population-based studies comprising 49 697 subjects were finally included. The prevalence of ERM and the ORs of potential risk factors (age, sex, myopia, hypertension and so on) were extracted.ResultsThe pooled age-standardised prevalence estimates of earlier ERM (cellophane macular reflex (CMR)), advanced ERM (preretinal macular fibrosis (PMF)) and any ERM were 6.5% (95% CI 4.2% to 8.9%), 2.6% (95% CI 1.8% to 3.4%) and 9.1% (95% CI 6.0% to 12.2%), respectively. In the subgroup analysis, race and photography modality contributed to the variation in the prevalence estimates of PMF, while the WHO regions and image reading methods were associated with the varied prevalence of CMR and any ERM. Meta-analysis showed that only greater age and female significantly conferred a higher risk of ERMs.ConclusionsOur findings suggest that ERMs are relatively common among aged population. Race, image taking and reading methodology may play important roles in influencing the large variability of ERM prevalence estimates.

scholarly journals Misuse of medication in adult substance misuse services: a systematic review protocol

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (6) ◽  
pp. e047283
Author(s):  
Rosalind Gittins ◽  
Louise Missen ◽  
Ian Maidment
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Substance Misuse ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Grey Literature ◽  
Opioid Analgesics ◽  
Physical And Mental Health ◽  
Qualitative Synthesis ◽  
Treatment Services ◽  
The Impact

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.

scholarly journals Prevalence of retinopathy in prediabetes: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. e040997
Author(s):  
Varo Kirthi ◽  
Paul Nderitu ◽  
Uazman Alam ◽  
Jennifer Evans ◽  
Sarah Nevitt ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Diabetic Retinopathy ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
International Diabetes Federation ◽  
Current Data ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Fundus Photography ◽  
Primary Data ◽  
Cochrane Library

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.

scholarly journals Effectiveness of Antalgic Therapies in Patients with Vertebral Bone Metastasis: A Protocol for a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (8) ◽  
pp. 3991
Author(s):  
Antonio Jose Martin-Perez ◽  
María Fernández-González ◽  
Paula Postigo-Martin ◽  
Marc Sampedro Pilegaard ◽  
Carolina Fernández-Lao ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Bone Metastasis ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Pharmacological Intervention ◽  
Vertebral Metastasis ◽  
Randomized Controlled Clinical Trials

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.

scholarly journals Effectiveness of trauma care systems at different stages of development in reducing mortality: a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (6) ◽  
pp. e047439
Author(s):  
Rayan Jafnan Alharbi ◽  
Virginia Lewis ◽  
Sumina Shrestha ◽  
Charne Miller
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Trauma Care ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Trauma System ◽  
Secondary Data ◽  
Trauma Centre ◽  
Trauma Patients ◽  
Trauma Systems ◽  
Stages Of Development

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