scholarly journals Effect of Exercise and Meditation on Depression and Anxiety Reduction: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Saeed Mohammadi ◽  
◽  
Komeil Zahedi ◽  
Mojtaba Tashkeh ◽  
◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Aerobic Exercise ◽  
Web Of Science ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Female Gender ◽  
Anxiety Reduction ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Random Effects Model ◽  
Depression And Anxiety ◽  
Standardized Mean Difference

Objectives: Despite the existence of studies that associated effect of exercise and meditation on depression and anxiety, there was no meta-analysis to date, that can prove this effect definitely. Also, the effect of these factors by gender and aerobic exercise are unknown. This gap was addressed by this meta-analysis. Methods: Major electronic databases, including PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase were searched until July 2019. Studies addressing the effect of exercise and meditation on depression and anxiety were enrolled. The heterogeneity across studies was investigated by Q-test and I2 statistic. The probability of publication bias was explored using Beggchr('39')s and Eggerchr('39')s tests. The results were expressed as the standardized mean difference (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) using a random-effects model. Results: We identified a total of 10,015 references and included 51 studies involving 3,594 participants. Compared control group, the SMD estimate of anxiety was -0.7 (-1.20, -0.19) for meditation, -0.9 (-1.24, -0.57) for aerobic, -1.07 (-1.67, -0.46) for other exercise, and the SMD estimate of depression was-0.84 (-1.26, -0.42) for meditation, -0.44 (-0.72, -0.17) for aerobic, and -1.10 (-1.55, -0.65) for other exercise. Conclusions: Exercise and meditation had a significant effect on depression and anxiety. Furthermore, there was an effect of the exercise and meditation on depression and anxiety by female gender and aerobic exercise.

scholarly journals Effect of Exercise and Meditation on Depression and Anxiety Reduction: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 27 (2) ◽  
pp. 144-161
Author(s):  
Saeed Mohammadi ◽  
◽  
Komeil Zahedi Tajrishi ◽  
Mojtaba Tashkeh ◽  
◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Aerobic Exercise ◽  
Web Of Science ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Female Gender ◽  
Anxiety Reduction ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Random Effects Model ◽  
Depression And Anxiety ◽  
Standardized Mean Difference

Objectives: Despite the studies that examined the effect of exercise and meditation on depression and anxiety, no meta-analysis has proved this effect so far. Also, the effect of these factors is unknown in terms of gender and aerobic exercise. This meta-analysis addressed these gaps. Methods: Major electronic databases, including PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase, were searched until July 2019. Studies addressing the effect of exercise and meditation on depression and anxiety were found. Q-test and I2 statistic investigated the heterogeneity across the studies. The probability of publication bias was explored using Begg's and Egger's tests. The results were expressed as the Standardized Mean Difference (SMD) with a 95% confidence interval using a random-effects model. Results: We identified a total of 10015 references and 51 studies involving 3594 participants. Compared with the control group, the SMD estimate of anxiety was -0.7 (-1.20, -0.19) for meditation, -0.9 (-1.24, -0.57) for aerobic, and -1.07 (-1.67, -0.46) for other exercises. Also, the SMD estimate of depression was-0.84 (-1.26, -0.42) for meditation, -0.44 (-0.72, -0.17) for aerobic, and -1.10 (-1.55, -0.65) for other exercises. Conclusion: Exercise and meditation had a significant effect on depression and anxiety. Furthermore, there was an effect of the exercise and meditation on depression and anxiety regarding the female gender and aerobic exercise.

Circulating chemerin level and risk of cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 14 (10) ◽  
pp. 919-928 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xiaolong Qi ◽  
Jiayao Fan ◽  
Jiahao Zhu ◽  
Yuxiao Ling ◽  
Shuai Mi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Web Of Science ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Random Effects Model ◽  
Standardized Mean Difference ◽  
Mean Differences ◽  
High Level ◽  
Risk Of Cancer ◽  
The Relationship

Aim: Circulating chemerin level has been reported to be higher in patients with various types of cancer. However, the conclusions obtained are not unified. The aim of present study is to draw an evidence-based conclusion on the relationship between circulating chemerin and risk of cancer. Materials & methods: A systematic search was carried out in PubMed and Web of Science up to 30 June 2019. The random-effects model was applied to calculate summary standardized mean differences with 95% CIs. Results: The meta-analysis included a total of 12 separate studies, 876 cases and 739 healthy controls. The results showed that the expression level of circulating chemerin was significantly higher in cancer patients than that in control group (pooled standardized mean difference = 1.47, 95% CI = 1.03–1.90). Conclusion: This meta-analysis concludes that a high level of circulating chemerin is strongly associated with cancer risk.

scholarly journals The Effect of Aromatherapy Alone or in Combination with Massage on Dysmenorrhea: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 43 (12) ◽  
pp. 968-979
Author(s):  
Mona Najaf Najafi ◽  
Neshat Najaf Najafi ◽  
Farzaneh Rashidi Fakari ◽  
Somayeh Moeindarbary ◽  
Fatemeh Abdi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Herbal Medicine ◽  
Web Of Science ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Insufficient Data ◽  
Relevant Research ◽  
Jadad Scale ◽  
Standardized Mean Difference ◽  
Present Systematic Review

Abstract Objective The aim of the present systematic review meta-analysis is to assess the effect of olfactory stimulation on reducing dysmenorrhea. Methods Systematic search was conducted in several databases, such as PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane, and Scopus, to identify relevant research up to October 26, 2019. The identified studies were evaluated based on a modified Jadad scale. The intervention involves aromatherapy alone or in combination with essential oils. There was no restriction for the control group such as a placebo group or other common treatments. The Comprehensive Meta-Analysis Version 2 (Bio stat, Englewood, NJ, USA) was used for meta-analysis. Cochran's Q and I2 tests were utilized. Results The findings of our meta-analysis, which contained 13 trials (15 data), showed that dysmenorrhea decreased significantly in the group receiving aromatherapy with herbal compared with the control group (standardized mean difference [SMD] = -0.795; 95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.922 to- 0.667; 17 trials O < 0.001); heterogeneity; I2 = 19.47%; p = 0.236). In addition, four studies with insufficient data were not included in our meta-analysis. The results of all studies suggested that aromatherapy with herbal medicine group compared with control group is effective. Conclusion Aromatherapy with herbal medicine decreased dysmenorrhea. This treatment was particularly effective when aroma oil was combined with massage or when a mixture of aroma oil was used for the treatment of dysmenorrhea.

Intralymphatic immunotherapy for allergic rhinitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 42 (4) ◽  
pp. 283-292 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael T. Werner ◽  
John V. Bosso
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Allergic Rhinitis ◽  
Adverse Event ◽  
Skin Prick Testing ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Mean Difference ◽  
Random Effects Model ◽  
Nasal Provocation ◽  
Intralymphatic Immunotherapy ◽  
Standardized Mean Difference

Background: Only a fraction of patients with allergic rhinitis receive allergen-specific immunotherapy (AIT). AIT is most commonly delivered subcutaneously in a series of injections over 3‐5 years. Common obstacles to completing this therapy include cost and inconvenience. Intralymphatic immunotherapy (ILIT) has been proposed as a faster alternative, which requires as few as three injections spaced 4 weeks apart. Objective: This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the current evidence that supports the use of ILIT for allergic rhinitis. Methods: Clinical trials were identified in the published literature by using an electronic search strategy and were evaluated by using a risk of bias tool. Treatment outcome (symptom scores, medication scores, and combined symptom and medication scores) and provocation testing results (nasal provocation and skin-prick testing) were included in a meta-analysis of standardized mean difference with subgrouping by using a random-effects model. Overall adverse event rates were tabulated, and overall risk ratios were calculated by using a random-effects model. Results: We identified 17 clinical trials that met eligibility criteria. The standardized mean difference of ILIT on the symptom and medication score was ‐0.72 (95% confidence interval [CI], ‐0.98 to ‐0.46; p < 0.0001) (n = 10). The standardized mean difference of ILIT on nasal provocation and skin-prick testing was ‐1.00 (95% CI, ‐1.38 to ‐0.61; p < 0.0001) (n = 7) and ‐0.73 (95% CI, ‐0.99 to ‐0.47; p < 0.0001) (n = 7), respectively. No statistically significant heterogeneity was detected. The overall adverse event rate was 39.5% for ILIT and 23.5% for placebo. Also, 98.4% of adverse events were mild. Conclusion: Our meta-analysis demonstrated that ILIT was safe, conferred desensitization to seasonal and nonseasonal allergens, alleviated allergic rhinitis symptoms, and reduced medication use. A larger randomized, double-blind, placebo controlled trial will be necessary for wider adaptation of this form of AIT.

scholarly journals The effect of unilateral and bilateral laparoscopic surgery for endometriosis on Anti-Mullerian Hormone (AMH) level after 3 and 6 months: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Anisodowleh Nankali ◽  
Mohsen Kazeminia ◽  
Parnian Kord Jamshidi ◽  
Shamarina Shohaimi ◽  
Nader Salari ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Laparoscopic Surgery ◽  
Growth Factors ◽  
Web Of Science ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Research Work ◽  
Mean Difference ◽  
Transient Growth ◽  
Common Causes ◽  
Standardized Mean Difference

Abstract Background Endometriosis is one of the most common causes of infertility. The causes of the disease and its definitive treatments are still unclear. Moreover, Anti-Mullerian Hormone (AMH) is a glycoprotein dimer that is a member of the transient growth factors family. This research work aimed to identify the effect of unilateral and bilateral laparoscopic surgery for endometriosis on AMH levels after 3 months, and 6 months, using meta-analysis. Methods In this study, the articles published in national and international databases of SID, MagIran, IranMedex, IranDoc, Cochrane, Embase, Science Direct, Scopus, PubMed, and Web of Science (ISI) were searched to find electronically published studies between 2010 and 2019. The heterogeneous index between studies was determined using the I2 index. Results In this meta-analysis and systematic review, 19 articles were eligible for inclusion in the study. The standardized mean difference was obtained in examining of unilateral laparoscopic surgery for endometriosis (before intervention 2.8 ± 0.11, and after 3 months 2.05 ± 0.13; and before intervention 3.1 ± 0.46 and after 6 months 2.08 ± 0.31), and in examining bilateral laparoscopic surgery for endometriosis examination (before intervention 2.0 ± 08.08, and after 3 months 1.1 ± 0.1; and before intervention 2.9 ± 0.23 and after 6 months 1.4 ± 0.19). Conclusion The results of this study demonstrate that unilateral and bilateral laparoscopic surgery for endometriosis is effective on AMH levels, and the level decreases in both comparisons.

Effectiveness of Aerobic Exercise on Smoking Cessation in Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 230-242
Author(s):  
Caroline Pereira Santos ◽  
Mahara Proença ◽  
Tamara dos Santos Gouveia ◽  
Crystian Bitencourt Soares de Oliveira ◽  
Guilherme Yassuki Tacao ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Smoking Cessation ◽  
Aerobic Exercise ◽  
Usual Care ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Continuous Abstinence ◽  
Different Characteristics

Background: The specific benefits of aerobic exercises in smoking cessation are unclear, as they have different characteristics, intensities, and durations. The purpose of this systematic review with meta-analysis was to evaluate the effects of aerobic exercise, with or without co-interventions, compared with a control group of cognitive behavior treatment on smoking cessation. Methods: This review was prospectively registered on PROSPERO, and the searches were performed from 2016 to 2018. Randomized controlled trials evaluating the effects of aerobic exercise, with or without nicotine therapy replacement, compared with usual care were included. The primary outcome was smoking cessation defined as the prevalence of those who quit or continuous abstinence. Meta-analysis was calculated using random effects model in the comprehensive meta-analysis software. Results: The authors identified 18 trials reporting data for a total of 2815 participants. There was moderate-quality evidence that aerobic exercise was better than usual care in promoting smoking cessation at short term (11 trials, risk ratio 0.79; 95% confidence interval, 0.66–0.94). However, there were no differences between aerobic exercises and usual care at medium- or long-term follow-ups. Conclusions: According to review, aerobic exercise may be effective in promoting smoking cessation at short-term, but not at medium- and long-term follow-ups.

scholarly journals Effects of Psycho-education Interventions on Perceived Childbirth Fear and Anxiety by Pregnant Women: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
pp. 230-237
Author(s):  
Masomeh Adeli Gargari ◽  
Khalil Esmailpour ◽  
Mojgan Mirghafourvand ◽  
Roghaiyeh Nourizadeh ◽  
Esmat Mehrabi
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Web Of Science ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Cesarean Sections ◽  
Natural Childbirth ◽  
Extensive Search ◽  
Education Interventions ◽  
Fear And Anxiety ◽  
Psychoeducational Interventions

Objectives: Phobia of natural childbirth is one of the most important and influencing factors leading women to request cesarean sections. The present study aimed to prepare a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the type of interventions related to fear of childbirth (FOC). Materials and Methods: The data collection was based on an extensive search of articles related to clinical trials (1990-2019) posted on Google Scholar, Cochran, SID, Magiran, Web of Science, Scopus, and PubMed electronic databases. In general, 109 abstracts were selected after eliminating similar publications. As a result of the qualitative evaluations of these articles, 11 studies were kept for investigation. Results: The studies were categorized into three groups including prenatal education with childbirth counseling, yoga courses, and psychoeducational-based interventions. Based on the meta-analysis, psychoeducational interventions have a significant effect on childbirth fears and anxiety in comparison with the control group (mean difference: 0.85, 95% CI: -1.20–0.45, P < 0.0001, I2 = 82%). Conclusions: Psychologically-based interventions, can creatively play an essential role in reducing the FOC during pregnancy and even childbirth. It can also create a pleasant and traumatic-free experience which is essential for encouraging women to have a natural childbirth.

scholarly journals A systematic review and meta-analysis of the efficacy of medical masks and N95 respirators for protection against respiratory infectious diseases, including COVID-19 in medical staff

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
MM Gao-hong Wu ◽  
MB Ping Jiang ◽  
MB Huan Yuan ◽  
Shi ◽  
Zhu
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Infectious Diseases ◽  
Observational Studies ◽  
Web Of Science ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Significant Protection ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Respiratory Infectious Diseases ◽  
N95 Respirators

Abstract To evaluate the efficacy of N95 respirators and medical masks for protection against respiratory infectious diseases, including COVID-19. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies evaluating the use of N95 respirators and medical masks for protection against respiratory infectious diseases. We retrieved relevant articles published from January 1994 to January 2020 by searching the PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane CENTRAL, and Web of Science databases. The study quality was evaluated using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool with RevMan 5.3 software. Eleven RCTs adjusted for clustering were included in the meta-analysis. Compared with the control group, N95 respirators or medical masks conferred significant protection against respiratory infectious diseases (odds ratio (OR) = 0.50; 95% CI: 0.29–0.84). Compared to medical masks, N95 respirators conferred significant protection against respiratory infectious diseases (OR = 0.75; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.57–0.99). Meta-analysis of 10 observational studies adjusting for clustering also suggested that N95 respirators and medical masks are effective for protection against respiratory infectious diseases (OR = 0.59; 95% CI: 0.42–0.82). However, only one case report showed the effectiveness of medical masks for preventing COVID-19. Although medical masks and N95 respirators may confer significant protection against respiratory infectious diseases, there is insufficient evidence to conclude that these types of personal protective equipment offer similar protection against COVID-19. Therefore, in the absence of sufficient resources during an epidemic, medical masks and N95 respirators should be reserved for high-risk, aerosol-generating producing procedures.

Attentional bias toward health-threat in health anxiety: a systematic review and three-level meta-analysis

2022 ◽  
pp. 1-10
Author(s):  
Congrong Shi ◽  
Steven Taylor ◽  
Michael Witthöft ◽  
Xiayu Du ◽  
Tao Zhang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Theoretical Model ◽  
Attentional Bias ◽  
Web Of Science ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Health Anxiety ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Anxiety Group ◽  
Health Threat ◽  
Maintenance Model

Abstract Attentional bias toward health-threat may theoretically contribute to the development and maintenance of health anxiety, but the empirical findings have been controversial. This study aimed to synthesize and explore the heterogeneity in a health-threat related attentional bias of health-anxious individuals, and to determine the theoretical model that better represents the pattern of attentional bias in health anxiety. Four databases (Web of Science, PubMed, PsycINFO, and Scopus) were searched for relevant studies, with 17 articles (N = 1546) included for a qualitative review and 16 articles (18 studies) for a three-level meta-analysis (N = 1490). The meta-analytic results indicated that the health anxiety group, compared to the control group, showed significantly greater attentional bias toward health-threat (g = 0.256). Further analyses revealed that attentional bias type, paradigm, and stimuli type were significant moderators. Additionally, compared to the controls, health-anxious individuals displayed significantly greater attention maintenance (g = 0.327) but nonsignificant attention vigilance to health-threat (g = −0.116). Our results provide evidence for the attention maintenance model in health-anxious individuals. The implications for further research and treatment of elevated health anxiety in the context of coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) were also discussed.

scholarly journals Efficacy of Corticosteroids in Patients with SARS, MERS and COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (8) ◽  
pp. 2392 ◽  
Author(s):  
Keum Hwa Lee ◽  
Sojung Yoon ◽  
Gwang Hun Jeong ◽  
Jong Yeob Kim ◽  
Young Joo Han ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Random Effects ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Random Effect Model ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Random Effects Model ◽  
Number Of Patients ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Meta Analyses ◽  
Coronavirus Infections

(1) Background: The use of corticosteroids in critical coronavirus infections, including severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS), or Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), has been controversial. However, a meta-analysis on the efficacy of steroids in treating these coronavirus infections is lacking. (2) Purpose: We assessed a methodological criticism on the quality of previous published meta-analyses and the risk of misleading conclusions with important therapeutic consequences. We also examined the evidence of the efficacy of corticosteroids in reducing mortality in SARS, MERS and COVID-19. (3) Methods: PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science were used to identify studies published until 25 April 2020, that reported associations between steroid use and mortality in treating SARS/MERS/COVID-19. Two investigators screened and extracted data independently. Searches were restricted to studies on humans, and articles that did not report the exact number of patients in each group or data on mortality were excluded. We calculated odds ratios (ORs) or hazard ratios (HRs) under the fixed- and random-effect model. (4) Results: Eight articles (4051 patients) were eligible for inclusion. Among these selected studies, 3416 patients were diagnosed with SARS, 360 patients with MERS, and 275 with COVID-19; 60.3% patients were administered steroids. The meta-analyses including all studies showed no differences overall in terms of mortality (OR 1.152, 95% CI 0.631–2.101 in the random effects model, p = 0.645). However, this conclusion might be biased, because, in some studies, the patients in the steroid group had more severe symptoms than those in the control group. In contrast, when the meta-analysis was performed restricting only to studies that used appropriate adjustment (e.g., time, disease severity), there was a significant difference between the two groups (HR 0.378, 95% CI 0.221–0.646 in the random effects model, p < 0.0001). Although there was no difference in mortality when steroids were used in severe cases, there was a difference among the group with more underlying diseases (OR 3.133, 95% CI 1.670–5.877, p < 0.001). (5) Conclusions: To our knowledge, this study is the first comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis providing the most accurate evidence on the effect of steroids in coronavirus infections. If not contraindicated, and in the absence of side effects, the use of steroids should be considered in coronavirus infection including COVID-19.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document