Efficacy of Brucella abortus S19 and RB51 vaccine strains: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
JM Blasco ◽  
E Moreno ◽  
I Moriyón
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Brucella Abortus ◽  
Meta Analysis

scholarly journals Efficacy of Brucella abortus S19 and RB51 vaccine strains: a systematic review and meta‐analysis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marina Martins Oliveira ◽  
Carine Rodrigues Pereira ◽  
Izabela Regina Cardoso Oliveira ◽  
Jacques Godfroid ◽  
Andrey Pereira Lage ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Brucella Abortus ◽  
Meta Analysis

scholarly journals Efficacy of Brucella abortus S19 and RB51 vaccine strains: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elaine Dorneles ◽  
Marina Martins de Oliveira ◽  
Carine Pereira ◽  
Izabela Oliveira ◽  
Jacques Godfroid ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Vaccine Strain ◽  
Brucella Abortus ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Significant Protection ◽  
Bovine Brucellosis ◽  
Colony Forming Units ◽  
Protection Rate ◽  
Protection Against Infection ◽  
S19 Vaccine

This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to recalculate the efficacy of these two vaccine strains, and to discuss the main variables associated with controlled trials to evaluate bovine brucellosis vaccines efficacy. The most used vaccine strain was S19, at the dose of 10 colony forming units (CFU), followed by the vaccine strain RB51 at 10 CFU. The most used challenge strain was B. abortus 2308, at the dose of 10 CFU by intraconjunctival route. For the meta-analysis, trials were grouped according to the vaccine strain and dose to recalculate protection against abortion (four groups) or infection (five groups), using pooled risk ratio (RR) and vaccine efficacy (VE). For protection against abortion (n = 15 trials), S19 vaccine at 10 CFU exhibited the highest protection rate (RR = 0.25, 95% CI: 0.12 to 0.52; VE = 75.09%, 95% CI: 48.08 – 88.05), followed by RB51 10 (RR = 0.31, 95% CI: 0.16 to 0.61; VE = 69.25%, 95% CI: 39.48 – 84.38). For protection against infection (n = 23 trials), only two subgroups exhibited significant protection: S19 at 10 CFU (RR = 0.28, 95% CI: 0.14 to 0.55; VE = 72.03%, 95% CI: 57.70 – 81.50) and RB51 at 10 CFU dose (RR = 0.43, 95% CI: 0.22 to 0.84; VE = 57.05%, 95% CI: 30.90 – 73.30). In conclusion, our results suggest that the dose of 10 CFU for S19 and 10 CFU for RB51 are the most suitable for the prevention of abortion and infection caused by B. abortus.

The effects of low-ratio n-6/n-3 PUFA on biomarkers of inflammation: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yali Wei ◽  
Yan Meng ◽  
Na Li ◽  
Qian Wang ◽  
Liyong Chen
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Fatty Acid ◽  
Polyunsaturated Fatty Acid ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Chain Polyunsaturated Fatty Acid ◽  
Inflammation Markers ◽  
Pufa Supplementation ◽  
Long Chain

The purpose of the systematic review and meta-analysis was to determine if low-ratio n-6/n-3 long-chain polyunsaturated fatty acid (PUFA) supplementation affects serum inflammation markers based on current studies.

The association between dietary inflammatory index and risk of central obesity in adults: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 90 (5-6) ◽  
pp. 535-552 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mahdieh Abbasalizad Farhangi ◽  
Mahdi Vajdi
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Observational Studies ◽  
Central Obesity ◽  
Assessment Tool ◽  
Weighted Mean Difference ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Dietary Factors ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Inflammatory Status ◽  
Obesity Indices

Abstract. Backgrounds: Central obesity, as a pivotal component of metabolic syndrome is associated with numerous co-morbidities. Dietary factors influence central obesity by increased inflammatory status. However, recent studies didn’t evaluate the association between central obesity and dietary inflammation index (DII®) that give score to dietary factors according to their inflammatory potential. In the current systematic review and meta-analysis, we summarized the studies that investigated the association between DII® with central obesity indices in the general populations. Methods: In a systematic search from PubMed, SCOPUS, Web of Sciences and Cochrane electronic databases, we collected relevant studies written in English and published until 30 October 2019. The population of included studies were apparently healthy subjects or individuals with obesity or obesity-related diseases. Observational studies that evaluated the association between DII® and indices of central obesity including WC or WHR were included. Results: Totally thirty-two studies were included; thirty studies were cross-sectional and two were cohort studies with 103071 participants. Meta-analysis of observational studies showed that higher DII® scores were associated with 1.81 cm increase in WC (Pooled weighted mean difference (WMD) = 1.813; CI: 0.785–2.841; p = 0.001). Also, a non-significant increase in the odds of having higher WC (OR = 1.162; CI: 0.95–1.43; p = 0.154) in the highest DII category was also observed. In subgroup analysis, the continent, dietary assessment tool and gender were the heterogeneity sources. Conclusion: The findings proposed that adherence to diets with high DII® scores was associated with increased WC. Further studies with interventional designs are necessary to elucidate the causality inference between DII® and central obesity indices.

Fear of pain and pain intensity: Meta-analysis and systematic review.

2020 ◽  
Vol 146 (5) ◽  
pp. 411-450 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tobias Markfelder ◽  
Paul Pauli
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Pain Intensity ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Fear Of Pain
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document