8/30/ · Statistical analysis. We meta-analysed baseline demographics, comparing the digoxin and control groups from all studies that provided unadjusted data, and summarised them as the weighted mean difference or odds ratio. Meta-analysis was prespecified to use a random effects model because of the anticipated variety in study designs and populations A meta-analysis can help iron out any inconsistencies in data, as long as the studies are similar. For instance, if your research is about the influence of the Mediterranean diet on diabetic people, between the ages of 30 and 45, but you only find a study about the Mediterranean diet in healthy people and another about the Mediterranean diet in 9/23/ · This meta-analysis reviewed the literature focusing on the relationship between reported racism and mental and physical health outcomes. Data from studies reported in articles published between and , and conducted predominately in the U.S., were analysed using random effects models and mean weighted effect sizes
Systematic Review VS Meta-Analysis | Elsevier Author Services Blog
Thank you for visiting nature. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer. In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript. Many recent studies have investigated the role of either Chloroquine CQ or Hydroxychloroquine HCQ alone or in combination with azithromycin AZM in the management of the emerging coronavirus.
This systematic review and meta-analysis of either published or preprint observational studies or randomized control trials RCT aimed to assess mortality rate, duration of hospital stay, need for mechanical ventilation MVvirologic cure rate VQRtime to a negative viral polymerase chain reaction PCRradiological progression, experiencing drug side effects, and clinical worsening. A search of the online database through June was performed and examined the reference lists of pertinent meta analysis review article for in-vivo studies only.
Despite the scarcity of published data of good quality, the effectiveness and safety of either HCQ alone or in combination with AZM in treating COVID cannot be assured. Future high-quality RCTs need to be carried out. Coronavirus disease COVID is a serious health problem caused by the novel Coronavirus nCOV or Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 SARS-CoV-2 1.
SARS-COV-2 is a member of the Coronavirus family, a family that was previously responsible for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome SARS in and Middle East Respiratory Syndrome MERS in 2, meta analysis review article.
COVID was emerged by the end of at Wuhan City in China and was notified by WHO to be a pandemic in March 3, meta analysis review article. Till the 19th of July, meta analysis review article,around 14 million COVID cases anddeaths were reported worldwide 4. Till now, there is no effective treatment for COVID 5.
Chloroquine CQ was initially reported to be effective against SARS-COV-2 and then Hydroxychloroquine HCQ followed 6. SARS-COV-2 is known to bind to human cells via the Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme 2 ACE 2 receptor 78. In-vitro studies showed that CQ and HCQ cause glycosylation of ACE2 receptor making cells to be refractory to SARS-COV-2 infection 8, meta analysis review article.
This makes the drugs possible players in the treatment and even the prophylaxis against COVID Both drugs have also been shown to have immunomodulatory effects 9.
HCQ is now broadly used in autoimmune diseases such as systemic lupus erythematosus SLE and rheumatoid arthritis RA 9. This makes both drugs potentially effective in reducing the severity of COVID through suppressing the immune system response to SARS-COV-2, which is now thought to be at least partly responsible for the severe forms of the disease 8, meta analysis review article.
The safety of both drugs is also an important issue. Although both drugs are generally well-tolerated, high doses can be associated with severe side effects like myopathy, neuropathy, and cardiomyopathy Retinopathy is a well-known side effect that is related to drug-prolonged use 9.
In-vivo studies showed contradictory results regarding CQ and HCQ in COVID Firstly, meta analysis review article, Chinese researchers reported the efficacy of CQ against COVID Then, a French research group reported the efficacy of HCQ added to Azithromycin AZM in decreasing viral load After that, meta analysis review article, many studies reported that these drugs had no benefit or even may cause harmful effects Here, we conducted an in-vivo systematic review and meta-analysis on the effectiveness and safety of either CQ or HCQ alone or in combination with AZM in treating COVID We performed this systematic review in strict compliance with the preferred reporting items of the systematic review and meta-analysis PRISMA checklist All steps were conducted in concordance with the Cochrane Handbook of Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Virological cure proportion of virological cure either overall or at a certain time day meta analysis review article, 10, or Mortality : The primary outcome measured in this study was mortality which was defined as the percentage of deaths that occurred during a study period.
Virological cure rate: Defined as the proportion of patients who achieved negative PCR. Time to negative PCR: Defined as the number of days until the PCR becames negative. It also included the virological cure rate in the days matched between at least two studies. Based on the results, we found matching on days 4, 10, and Radiological progression : included the number of patients who showed progression in their radiological CT results during the period of a study.
Need for mechanical ventilation MV : was represented by the percentage of patients who needed respiratory support through MV during treatment. Experiencing side effects : This outcome included any side effect that happened from using the studied treatment during a study.
A computer literature searches of PubMed, Google Scholar, Cochrane, Scopus, Web of Science, Segle, VLH, COVID-Inato, COVID-Trial, and Clinical Trial. gov was conducted till June 5th, using the following keywords Chloroquine OR Hydroxychloroquine AND novel Coronavirus disease OR COVID OR SARS-CoV-2 OR novel Coronavirus infection OR ncov infection OR Coronavirus disease OR Coronavirus disease OR ncov disease OR COV OR Coronavirus.
Eight independent reviewers screened the literature search result for relevant studies according to the pre-specified inclusion meta analysis review article exclusion criteria. Meta analysis review article references that meta analysis review article the same title and author and published in the same year or the same journal were removed. References remaining after this step were exported to a Microsoft Excel file with essential information for screening.
The title and abstract screening were done by seven independent reviewers to select papers based on the inclusion criteria. Each article was checked by two independent reviewers. Any disagreement was solved by the first author RG. During the full-text screening phase, all selected articles were downloaded, and the full text was reviewed by two independent reviewers.
The decision to include or exclude articles for qualitative and quantitative analysis should be agreed upon by the two reviewers to pass through. If any disagreement was noticed, the first author was asked to give his decision. The completed data were then thoroughly checked by two reviewers RG, AK.
We applied three methods to do manual searching. Firstly, we searched the reference lists of the included articles. Secondly, we performed citation tracking in which the reviewers track all the articles that cite each one of the included articles. This might involve the electronic searching of databases.
All excluded records were given exclusion reasons. Manually added research included preprint, and unpublished data if fulfilling the inclusion criteria. During the data extraction and the meta analysis review article assessment, in a Microsoft Excel sheet, two reviewers extracted data related to patient characteristics and outcomes authors, meta analysis review article, year of publication, country of patients, inclusion or exclusion criteria, when the study was conducted, study meta analysis review article, sample size, treatment option, dosage and duration, adverse events, primary and meta analysis review article outcomes.
Data were analyzed using Review Manager Software V5. For the continuous variables, data were pooled using the standardized mean difference SSMD. In the case of zero frequency, the correction value of 0. In the case of significant heterogeneity, we used the random effect model, otherwise, the fixed-effect model was used. Meta-regression analysis was done to examine the impact of the age difference, disease severity, sex, and country on HCQ regimen group mortality RR. Heterogeneity was assessed by the Chi-Square test X 2 and measured by the I-Square test.
The importance of the observed value of I 2 depends on the magnitude and direction of effects, and strength of evidence for heterogeneity e. P value from the chi-squared test, meta analysis review article, or a confidence interval for I 2. In the case of heterogeneity, DerSimonian and Laird random-effects models were applied to pool the outcomes.
Otherwise, the inverse variance fixed-effect model was used. Forest plots were presented to visualize the degree of variation between studies. In the case of the absence of mean, authors were emailed and asked for the required data, or they were calculated according to the mathemetical equation developed by Wan, et al.
Quality assessment QA of the research meta analysis review article on the study design. The risk of bias in the individual studies included for meta-analysis was assessed using the Cochrane risk assessment tool in cases of randomized control trials RCTs 20study quality assessment tools for observational studies 21and Robins-1 for meta analysis review article control trial The assessment was performed by three independent reviewers AA, AK, SH and further checked by two additional reviewers RG, RS.
Sensitivity analysis is known to be an essential part of systematic reviews with meta-analyses to determine the robustness of the obtained outcomes to the assumptions made in the data analysis We conducted leave one out sensitivity analysis to examine the effect of studies that greatly influenced the result, especially by their weight through excluding them from the meta-analysis.
A total of articles were found after searching 12 different databases. Of this number, duplicates were found by Endnote X8, and were published before so they were excluded. Title and abstract screening of papers resulted in exclusion of irrelevant papersretracted articles 15meta analysis review article, and manually found duplicates A total of articles were screened for eligability.
Finally, 23 papers were eligible, in addition to, 12 mannually added research. Of these 35 papers 14 studies entered in the meta-analysis Fig. Fourteen studies were included in the meta-analysis: 3 RCTs, meta analysis review article non-RCT, 3 case—control studies, and 6 retro or prospective cohort studies. HCQ arms of the comparative studies have been combined with observational studies for effect size meta-analysis.
Characteristics of studies entered the systematic review presented in Table 1. Quality assessment for the studies included in this meta-analysis was conducted using Cochran risk assesment tool, meta analysis review article, Jadad, ROBINS-I, and NOS checklists. Quality assement for RCTs is presented in the summary of the risk of bias graph Fig. a Risk of bias graph: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item presented as percentages across all included studies.
b Risk of bias summary: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item for each included study. Publication bias assessment of studied that assessed mortality was conducted by visual inspection of the funnel plot Mortality of HCQ was addressed in 8 studies, however, controversial results were seen.
Yu et al. While Rosenberg et al. and Magagnoli et al. Of note, among the 20 patients included in the study of Guatret et al. Pooled RR showed that there was no significant difference between the two groups in mortality RR of 0. Leave one meta analysis review article sensitivity analysis revealed a considerable heterogeneity at all stages of the test. All studies nearly equally contributed to the overall heterogeneity.
Hence, meta-regression was conducted to underline the meta analysis review article effect of covariates, meta analysis review article.
A three minute primer on meta-analysis
, time: 3:03Racism as a Determinant of Health: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
4/18/ · Prognostic Models Predicting Mortality in Preterm Infants: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Pauline E. van Beek, Peter Andriessen, Wes Onland, Ewoud Schuit Pediatrics Apr , e; DOI: /peds A meta-analysis is the use of statistical methods to summarise the results of these studies. Systematic reviews, just like other research articles, can be of varying quality. They are a significant piece of work (the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination at York estimates that a team will take months), and to be useful to other researchers and practitioners they should have 1 day ago · This systematic review was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. PubMed and Embase were searched from inception to 31 December Included studies involved patients with uncorrected coagulopathy due to disease (e.g. thrombocytopenia, liver cirrhosis, kidney failure
No comments:
Post a Comment