Scoring systems for the prediction of choledocholithiasis: systematic review and meta-analysis (protocol) v2 (protocols.io.bm7xk9pn)

Background: Multiple lines of evidence indicate protective effects of carotenoids in Alzheimer’s disease (AD). However, previous epidemiological studies reported inconsistent results regarding the associations between carotenoids levels and the risk of AD. Objective: Our study aims to evaluate the associations of six major members of carotenoids with the occurrence of AD by conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis. Methods: Following PRISMA guidelines, a comprehensive literature search of PubMed, Web of Science, Ebsco, and PsycINFO databases was conducted, and the quality of each included studies was evaluated by a validated scoring systems. Standardized mean differences (SMD) with 95%confidence intervals (CI) were determined by using a random effects model. Heterogeneity was evaluated by I2 statistics. Publication bias was detected using funnel plots and Egger’s test. Results: Sixteen studies, with 10,633 participants were included. Pooled analysis showed significantly lower plasma/serum levels of lutein (SMD = –0.86, 95%CI: –1.67 to –0.05, p = 0.04) and zeaxanthin (SMD = –0.59; 95%CI: –1.12 to –0.06, p = 0.03) in patients with AD versus cognitively intact controls, while α-carotene (SMD = 0.21, 95%CI: –0.68 to 0.26, p = 0.39), β-carotene (SMD = 0.04, 95%CI: –0.57 to 0.65, p = 0.9), lycopene (SMD = –0.12, 95%CI: –0.96 to 0.72, p = 0.78), and β-cryptoxanthin (SMD = –0.09, 95%CI: –0.83 to 0.65, p = 0.81) did not achieve significant differences. Conclusion: Of six major members of carotenoids, only lutein and zeaxanthin concentrations in plasma/serum were inversely related to the risk of AD. More high-quality longitudinal studies are needed to verify these findings.

Download Full-text

Biomechanical differences at the hemiparetic knee in people with stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol

Physical Therapy Reviews ◽

10.1080/10833196.2021.1880037 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 1-9

Author(s):

Clifford Waller ◽

Bahram Sangelaji ◽

Peter Lamb ◽

Suzanne Kuys ◽

Stephanie J. Woodley

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Analysis Protocol

Download Full-text

A systematic review and meta-analysis protocol examining the clinical characteristics and epidemiological features of olfactory dysfunction (OD) in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)

Systematic Reviews ◽

10.1186/s13643-021-01624-6 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 10 (1) ◽

Author(s):

Rosemond Qian-Xiu Tan ◽

Wai Tak Victor Li ◽

Wing-Zi Shum ◽

Sheung Chit Chu ◽

Hang-Long Li ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Clinical Data ◽

Systematic Reviews ◽

Clinical Characteristics ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Olfactory Dysfunction ◽

Statistical Analyses ◽

Human Populations ◽

Meta Analyses ◽

Analysis Protocol

Abstract Background The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has caused recurring and major outbreaks in multiple human populations around the world. The plethora of clinical presentations of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has been described extensively, of which olfactory dysfunction (OD) was established as an important and common extrapulmonary manifestation of COVID-19 infection. The aim of this protocol is to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis on peer-reviewed articles which described clinical data of OD in COVID-19 patients. Methods This research protocol has been prospectively registered with the Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO; CRD42020196202). CINAHL, ClinicalTrials.gov, Cochrane Central, EMBASE, MEDLINE and PubMed, as well as Chinese medical databases China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), VIP and WANFANG, will be searched using keywords including ‘COVID-19’, ‘coronavirus disease’, ‘2019-nCoV’, ‘SARS-CoV-2’, ‘novel coronavirus’, ‘anosmia’, ‘hyposmia’, ‘loss of smell’, and ‘olfactory dysfunction’. Systematic review and meta-analysis will be conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) and the Meta-analyses Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) guidelines. Articles will be screened according to pre-specified inclusion and exclusion criteria to extract studies that include new clinical data investigating the effect of COVID-19 on olfactory dysfunction. Included articles will be reviewed in full; data including patient demographics, clinical characteristics of COVID-19-related OD, methods of olfactory assessment and relevant clinical outcomes will be extracted. Statistical analyses will be performed using the Comprehensive Meta-Analysis version 3. Discussion This systematic review and meta-analysis protocol will aim to collate and synthesise all available clinical evidence regarding COVID-19-related OD as an important neurosensory dysfunction of COVID-19 infection. A comprehensive search strategy and screening process will be conducted to incorporate broad clinical data for robust statistical analyses and representation. The outcome of the systematic review and meta-analysis will aim to improve our understanding of the symptomatology and clinical characteristics of COVID-19-related OD and identify knowledge gaps in its disease process, which will guide future research in this specific neurosensory defect. Systematic review registration PROSPERO registration number: CRD42020196202.

Download Full-text