scholarly journals Prevalence of Pathogens in Poultry Meat: A Meta-Analysis of European Published Surveys

Foods ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 7 (5) ◽  
pp. 69 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andiara Gonçalves-Tenório ◽  
Beatriz Silva ◽  
Vânia Rodrigues ◽  
Vasco Cadavez ◽  
Ursula Gonzales-Barron
Keyword(s):  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Management Strategies ◽  
Poultry Meat ◽  
Salmonella Spp ◽  
Cold Preservation ◽  
Incidence Data ◽  
Pooled Prevalence ◽  
Risk Management Strategies ◽  
Study Characteristics ◽  
Campylobacter Spp

The objective of this study was to investigate and summarize the levels of incidence of Salmonella spp., Listeria monocytogenes, Staphylococcus aureus and Campylobacter spp. in poultry meat commercialized in Europe. After systematic review, incidence data and study characteristics were extracted from 78 studies conducted in 21 European countries. Pooled prevalence values from 203 extracted observations were estimated from random-effects meta-analysis models adjusted by pathogen, poultry type, sampling stage, cold preservation type, meat cutting type and packaging status. The results suggest that S. aureus is the main pathogen detected in poultry meat (38.5%; 95% CI: 25.4–53.4), followed by Campylobacter spp. (33.3%; 95% CI: 22.3–46.4%), while L. monocytogenes and Salmonella spp. present lower prevalence (19.3%; 95% CI: 14.4–25.3% and 7.10%; 95% CI: 4.60–10.8%, respectively). Despite the differences in prevalence, all pathogens were found in chicken and other poultry meats, at both end-processing step and retail level, in packed and unpacked products and in several meat cutting types. Prevalence data on cold preservation products also revealed that chilling and freezing can reduce the proliferation of pathogens but might not be able to inactivate them. The results of this meta-analysis highlight that further risk management strategies are needed to reduce pathogen incidence in poultry meat throughout the entire food chain across Europe, in particular for S. aureus and Campylobacter spp.

scholarly journals More than 50 long-term effects of COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sandra Lopez-Leon ◽  
Talia Wegman-Ostrosky ◽  
Carol Perelman ◽  
Rosalinda Sepulveda ◽  
Paulina A. Rebolledo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Management Strategies ◽  
Original Data ◽  
Long Term Effects ◽  
Pooled Prevalence ◽  
Attention Disorder ◽  
Initial Recovery ◽  
Meta Analyses

AbstractCOVID-19 can involve persistence, sequelae, and other medical complications that last weeks to months after initial recovery. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to identify studies assessing the long-term effects of COVID-19. LitCOVID and Embase were searched to identify articles with original data published before the 1st of January 2021, with a minimum of 100 patients. For effects reported in two or more studies, meta-analyses using a random-effects model were performed using the MetaXL software to estimate the pooled prevalence with 95% CI. PRISMA guidelines were followed. A total of 18,251 publications were identified, of which 15 met the inclusion criteria. The prevalence of 55 long-term effects was estimated, 21 meta-analyses were performed, and 47,910 patients were included (age 17–87 years). The included studies defined long-COVID as ranging from 14 to 110 days post-viral infection. It was estimated that 80% of the infected patients with SARS-CoV-2 developed one or more long-term symptoms. The five most common symptoms were fatigue (58%), headache (44%), attention disorder (27%), hair loss (25%), and dyspnea (24%). Multi-disciplinary teams are crucial to developing preventive measures, rehabilitation techniques, and clinical management strategies with whole-patient perspectives designed to address long COVID-19 care.

Prevalence of bipolar disorder in multiple sclerosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
pp. ebmental-2020-300207
Author(s):  
Boney Joseph ◽  
Aiswarya L Nandakumar ◽  
Ahmed T Ahmed ◽  
Neethu Gopal ◽  
M Hassan Murad ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Sclerosis ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Bipolar Disorder ◽  
Demyelinating Disease ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Statistical Significance ◽  
Management Strategies ◽  
Lifetime Prevalence ◽  
Ovid Medline ◽  
Pooled Prevalence

BackgroundMultiple sclerosis (MS) is a chronic disabling, demyelinating disease of the central nervous system and is often associated with psychiatric comorbidities. Some studies suggest increased prevalence of bipolar disorder (BD) in MS.ObjectiveTo conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis assessing the prevalence of BD in adults with MS.MethodsWe registered this review with PROSPERO and searched electronic databases (Ovid MEDLINE, Central, Embase, PsycINFO and Scopus) for eligible studies from earliest inception to October 2020. Prevalence data of BD in adult patients with MS were extracted. Meta-analysis was conducted using random-effects model.FindingsOf the 802 articles that were screened, 23 studies enrolling a total of 68 796 patients were included in the systematic review and meta-analysis. The pooled prevalence rate of BD in patients with MS was 2.95% (95% CI 2.12% to 4.09%) with higher prevalence in the Americas versus Europe. The lifetime prevalence of BD was 8.4% in patients with MS. Subgroup analysis showed a higher prevalence of BD in MS in females (7.03%) than in males (5.64%), which did not reach statistical significance (p=0.53).ConclusionsThis meta-analysis suggests a high lifetime prevalence of BD in patients with MS. Patients with MS should be routinely screened for BD. Further assessment of bipolar comorbidity in MS through prospective studies may help in developing effective management strategies and may improve treatment outcomes in patients with MS.

scholarly journals More Than 50 Long-Term Effects of COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sandra Lopez-Leon ◽  
Talia Wegman-Ostrosky ◽  
Carol Perelman ◽  
Rosalinda Sepulveda ◽  
Paulina Rebolledo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Management Strategies ◽  
Original Data ◽  
Long Term Effects ◽  
Pooled Prevalence ◽  
Attention Disorder ◽  
Initial Recovery ◽  
Meta Analyses

Abstract Background. COVID-19, caused by SARS-CoV-2, can involve sequelae and other medical complications that last weeks to months after initial recovery, which has come to be called Long-COVID or COVID long-haulers. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to identify studies assessing long-term effects of COVID-19 and estimates the prevalence of each symptom, sign, or laboratory parameter of patients at a post-COVID-19 stage. Methods. LitCOVID (PubMed and Medline) and Embase were searched by two independent researchers. All articles with original data for detecting long-term COVID-19 published before 1st of January 2021 and with a minimum of 100 patients were included. For effects reported in two or more studies, meta-analyses using a random-effects model were performed using the MetaXL software to estimate the pooled prevalence with 95% CI. Heterogeneity was assessed using I2 statistics. This systematic review followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviewers and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines, although the study protocol was not registered. Results. A total of 18,251 publications were identified, of which 15 met the inclusion criteria. The prevalence of 55 long-term effects was estimated, 21 meta-analyses were performed, and 47,910 patients were included. The follow-up time ranged from 14 to 110 days post-viral infection. The age of the study participants ranged between 17 and 87 years. It was estimated that 80% (95% CI 65-92) of the patients that were infected with SARS-CoV-2 developed one or more long-term symptoms. The five most common symptoms were fatigue (58%), headache (44%), attention disorder (27%), hair loss (25%), and dyspnea (24%). All meta-analyses showed medium (n=2) to high heterogeneity (n=13). Conclusions. In order to have a better understanding, future studies need to stratify by sex, age, previous comorbidities, the severity of COVID-19 (ranging from asymptomatic to severe), and duration of each symptom. From the clinical perspective, multi-disciplinary teams are crucial to developing preventive measures, rehabilitation techniques, and clinical management strategies with whole-patient perspectives designed to address long COVID-19 care.

scholarly journals More than 50 Long-term effects of COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sandra Lopez-Leon ◽  
Talia Wegman-Ostrosky ◽  
Carol Perelman ◽  
Rosalinda Sepulveda ◽  
Paulina A Rebolledo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Management Strategies ◽  
Original Data ◽  
Long Term Effects ◽  
Pooled Prevalence ◽  
Attention Disorder ◽  
Initial Recovery ◽  
Meta Analyses

ABSTRACTCOVID-19, caused by SARS-CoV-2, can involve sequelae and other medical complications that last weeks to months after initial recovery, which has come to be called Long-COVID or COVID long-haulers. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to identify studies assessing long-term effects of COVID-19 and estimates the prevalence of each symptom, sign, or laboratory parameter of patients at a post-COVID-19 stage. LitCOVID (PubMed and Medline) and Embase were searched by two independent researchers. All articles with original data for detecting long-term COVID-19 published before 1st of January 2021 and with a minimum of 100 patients were included. For effects reported in two or more studies, meta-analyses using a random-effects model were performed using the MetaXL software to estimate the pooled prevalence with 95% CI. Heterogeneity was assessed using I2 statistics. This systematic review followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviewers and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines, although the study protocol was not registered. A total of 18,251 publications were identified, of which 15 met the inclusion criteria. The prevalence of 55 long-term effects was estimated, 21 meta-analyses were performed, and 47,910 patients were included. The follow-up time ranged from 14 to 110 days post-viral infection. The age of the study participants ranged between 17 and 87 years. It was estimated that 80% (95% CI 65-92) of the patients that were infected with SARS-CoV-2 developed one or more long-term symptoms. The five most common symptoms were fatigue (58%), headache (44%), attention disorder (27%), hair loss (25%), and dyspnea (24%). All meta-analyses showed medium (n=2) to high heterogeneity (n=13). In order to have a better understanding, future studies need to stratify by sex, age, previous comorbidities, severity of COVID-19 (ranging from asymptomatic to severe), and duration of each symptom. From the clinical perspective, multi-disciplinary teams are crucial to developing preventive measures, rehabilitation techniques, and clinical management strategies with whole-patient perspectives designed to address long COVID-19 care.

scholarly journals Headache in ADHD as comorbidity and a side effect of medications: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-12
Author(s):  
Pei-Yin Pan ◽  
Ulf Jonsson ◽  
Sabriye Selin Şahpazoğlu Çakmak ◽  
Alexander Häge ◽  
Sarah Hohmann ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Side Effect ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Management Strategies ◽  
Epidemiological Studies ◽  
Population Based ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Children With Adhd ◽  
Pooled Prevalence ◽  
Adhd Medications

Abstract There is mixed evidence on the association between headache and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), as well as headache and ADHD medications. This systematic review and meta-analysis investigated the co-occurrence of headache in children with ADHD, and the effects of ADHD medications on headache. Embase, Medline and PsycInfo were searched for population-based and clinical studies comparing the prevalence of headache in ADHD and controls through January 26, 2021. In addition, we updated the search of a previous systematic review and network meta-analysis of double-blind randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on ADHD medications on June 16, 2020. Trials of amphetamines, atomoxetine, bupropion, clonidine, guanfacine, methylphenidate, and modafinil with a placebo arm and reporting data on headache as an adverse event, were included. Thirteen epidemiological studies and 58 clinical trials were eligible for inclusion. In epidemiological studies, a significant association between headache and ADHD was found [odds ratio (OR) = 2.01, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.63–2.46], which remained significant when limited to studies reporting ORs adjusted for possible confounders. The pooled prevalence of headaches in children with ADHD was 26.6%. In RCTs, three ADHD medications were associated with increased headache during treatment periods, compared to placebo: atomoxetine (OR = 1.29, 95% CI = 1.06–1.56), guanfacine (OR = 1.43, 95% CI = 1.12–1.82), and methylphenidate (OR = 1.33, 95% CI = 1.09–1.63). The summarized evidence suggests that headache is common in children with ADHD, both as part of the clinical presentation as such and as a side effect of some standard medications. Monitoring and clinical management strategies of headache in ADHD, in general, and during pharmacological treatment are recommended.

scholarly journals Hemorrhagic and ischemic stroke in patients with coronavirus disease 2019: incidence, risk factors, and pathogenesis - a systematic review and meta-analysis

F1000Research ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 10 ◽  
pp. 34
Author(s):  
Syahrul Syahrul ◽  
Helnida Anggun Maliga ◽  
Muhammad Ilmawan ◽  
Marhami Fahriani ◽  
Sukamto S. Mamada ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ischemic Stroke ◽  
Mortality Rate ◽  
Hemorrhagic Stroke ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Mortality Rates ◽  
Stroke Incidence ◽  
Pooled Prevalence ◽  
Incidence Risk ◽  
Study Characteristics ◽  
Newcastle Ottawa Scale

Background: In this study, we aimed to determine the global prevalence, chronological order of symptom appearance, and mortality rates with regard to hemorrhagic and ischemic stroke in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and to discuss possible pathogeneses of hemorrhagic and ischemic stroke in individuals with the disease. Methods: We searched the PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases for relevant articles published up to November 8, 2020. Data regarding study characteristics, hemorrhagic stroke, ischemic stroke, and COVID-19 were retrieved in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. The Newcastle-Ottawa scale was used to assess the quality of the eligible studies. The pooled prevalence and mortality rate of hemorrhagic and ischemic stroke were calculated. Results: The pooled estimate of prevalence of hemorrhagic stroke was 0.46% (95% CI 0.40%–0.53%; I2=89.81%) among 67,155 COVID-19 patients and that of ischemic stroke was 1.11% (95% CI 1.03%–1.22%; I2=94.07%) among 58,104 COVID-19 patients. Ischemic stroke was more predominant (incidence: 71.58%) than hemorrhagic stroke (incidence: 28.42%) in COVID-19 patients who experienced a stroke. In COVID-19 patients who experienced a stroke, hospital admission with respiratory symptoms was more commonly reported than that with neurological symptoms (20.83% for hemorrhagic stroke and 5.51% for ischemic stroke versus 6.94% for hemorrhagic stroke and 5.33% for ischemic stroke, respectively). The pooled mortality rate of COVID-19 patients who experienced a hemorrhagic and ischemic stroke was 44.72% (95% CI 36.73%–52.98%) and 36.23% (95% CI 30.63%–42.24%), respectively. Conclusions: Although the occurrence of hemorrhagic and ischemic stroke is low, the mortality rates of both stroke types in patients with COVID-19 are concerning, and therefore, despite several potential pathogeneses that have been proposed, studies aimed at definitively elucidating the mechanisms of hemorrhagic and ischemic stroke in individuals with COVID-19 are warranted. PROSPERO registration: CRD42020224470 (04/12/20)

Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus in Poultry and Poultry Meat: A Meta-Analysis

2018 ◽  
Vol 81 (7) ◽  
pp. 1055-1062 ◽  
Author(s):  
CLAUDIA M. RIBEIRO ◽  
LENITA M. STEFANI ◽  
SIMONE B. LUCHEIS ◽  
WERNER OKANO ◽  
JULIANO CEZAR M. CRUZ ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Staphylococcus Aureus ◽  
Methicillin Resistant Staphylococcus Aureus ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Chicken Meat ◽  
Poultry Meat ◽  
Poultry Production ◽  
Production Chain ◽  
Methicillin Resistant ◽  
Turkey Meat ◽  
Pooled Prevalence

ABSTRACT Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) is a bacterium that colonizes and infects various host species and has been found in the poultry production chain, raising concerns about possible transmission from farm to fork. The objective of this study was to use meta-analytical methods to estimate the pooled prevalence of MRSA in chickens, turkeys, chicken meat, and turkey meat. Three electronic databases (PubMed, LILACS, and SciELO) were searched to establish MRSA prevalence from 51 studies published from 2003 through May 2017. The heterogeneity was assessed, and the pooled MRSA prevalence was calculated by using the random effects model according to the method of DerSimonian and Laird. Pooled MRSA prevalence (95% confidence interval [CI]) in turkeys, turkey meat, broilers, and chicken meat was 36% (1 to 78%), 13% (1 to 28%), 5% (2 to 9%), and 5% (3 to 8%), respectively. South America had the highest MRSA prevalence (27%; 95% CI, 17 to 37%), and North America had the lowest (1%; 95% CI, 0 to 2%). Livestock-associated MRSA has been isolated from poultry and poultry meat, indicating that this variant can spread from farm to fork. The presence of MRSA in poultry and poultry meat poses risks to public health, and steps should be taken to mitigate the contamination and spread of this bacterium along the poultry production chain.

scholarly journals Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Smell and Taste Disorders in COVID-19

OTO Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 2473974X2095797 ◽  
Author(s):  
Titus Sunday Ibekwe ◽  
Ayotunde James Fasunla ◽  
Adebola Emmanuel Orimadegun
Keyword(s):  
Regional Differences ◽  
Health Workers ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Case Identification ◽  
Pooled Prevalence ◽  
Study Characteristics ◽  
Early Case ◽  
Taste Disorders ◽  
Random Effects Modeling ◽  
Estimate Prevalence

Objective Loss of smell and taste are considered potential discriminatory symptoms indicating triaging for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and early case identification. However, the estimated prevalence essential to guide public health policy varies in published literature. This meta-analysis aimed to estimate prevalence of smell and taste loss among COVID-19 patients. Data Sources We conducted systematic searches of PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Google Scholar databases for studies published on the prevalence of smell and taste loss in COVID-19 patients. Review Methods Two authors extracted data on study characteristics and the prevalence of smell and taste loss. Random-effects modeling was used to estimate pooled prevalence. Subgroup analysis and meta-regression were conducted to explore potential heterogeneity sources. This study used PRISMA and MOOSE guidelines. Results Twenty-seven of 32 studies reported a prevalence of loss of smell, taste, or both from a combined sample of 20,451 COVID-19 patients. The estimated global pooled prevalence of loss of smell among 19,424 COVID-19 patients from 27 studies was 48.47% (95% CI, 33.78%-63.29%). Loss of taste was reported in 20 studies and 8001 patients with an estimated pooled prevalence of 41.47% (95% CI, 3.13%-31.03%), while 13 studies that reported combined loss of smell and taste in 5977 COVID-19 patients indicated a pooled prevalence of 35.04% (95% CI, 22.03%-49.26%). Conclusions The prevalence of smell and taste loss among COVID-19 patients was high globally, and regional differences supported the relevance of these symptoms as important markers. Health workers must consider them as suspicion indices for empirical diagnosis of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection.

The management of risk in a dryland environment

2011 ◽  
pp. 13-21
Author(s):  
D.I. Gray ◽  
J.I. Reid ◽  
D.J. Horne
Keyword(s):  
Risk Management ◽  
Service Providers ◽  
Management Strategies ◽  
Subterranean Clover ◽  
Farming Systems ◽  
Market Risk ◽  
Farm Size ◽  
Forage Crops ◽  
Risk Management Strategies ◽  
Upside Risk

A group of 24 Hawke's Bay hill country farmers are working with service providers to improve the resilience of their farming systems. An important step in the process was to undertake an inventory of their risk management strategies. Farmers were interviewed about their farming systems and risk management strategies and the data was analysed using descriptive statistics. There was considerable variation in the strategies adopted by the farmers to cope with a dryland environment. Importantly, these strategies had to cope with three types of drought and also upside risk (better than expected conditions), and so flexibility was critical. Infra-structure was important in managing a dryland environment. Farmers chose between increased scale (increasing farm size) and geographic dispersion (owning a second property in another location) through to intensification (investing in subdivision, drainage, capital fertiliser, new pasture species). The study identified that there may be scope for further investment in infra-structural elements such as drainage, deeper rooting alternative pasture species and water harvesting, along with improved management of subterranean clover to improve flexibility. Many of the farmers used forage crops and idling capacity (reduced stocking rate) to improve flexibility; others argued that maintaining pasture quality and managing upside risk was a better strategy in a dryland environment. Supplementary feed was an important strategy for some farmers, but its use was limited by contour and machinery constraints. A surprisingly large proportion of farmers run breeding cows, a policy that is much less flexible than trading stock. However, several farmers had improved their flexibility by running a high proportion of trading cattle and buffer mobs of ewe hoggets and trade lambs. To manage market risk, the majority of farmers are selling a large proportion of their lambs prime. Similarly, cattle are either sold prime or store onto the grass market when prices are at a premium. However, market risk associated with the purchase of supplements and grazing was poorly managed.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document