Explore the vast range of titles available.

The objective of the study is to identify items and domains applicable for the quality assessment of prevalence studies. We searched databases and the gray literature to identify tools or guides about the quality assessment of prevalence studies. After study selection, we abstracted questions applicable for prevalence studies and classified into at least one of the following domains: ‘population and setting’, ‘condition measurement’, ‘statistics’, and ‘other’. PROSPERO registration:CRD42018088437. We included 30 tools: eight (26.7%) specifically designed to appraise prevalence studies and 22 (73.3%) adaptable for this purpose. We identified 12 unique items in the domain “population and setting”, 16 in the domain “condition measurement”, and 14 in the domain “statistics”. Of those, 25 (59.5%) were identified in the eight specific tools. Regarding the domain “other”, we identified 77 unique items, mainly related to manuscript writing and reporting (n = 48, 62.3%); of those, 24 (31.2%) were identified in the eight specific tools and 53 (68.8%) in the additional 22 nonspecific tools. We provide a comprehensive set of items classified by domains that can guide the appraisal of prevalence studies, conduction of primary prevalence studies, and update or development of tools to evaluate prevalence studies.

Vasomotor symptoms (hot flushes and night sweats) and other symptoms, including depression, anxiety and panic attacks, are commonly experienced by menopausal women and have been associated with an unfavourable cardiovascular risk profile. To investigate whether presence of menopausal symptoms is associated with the development of cardiovascular disease (CVD). Five electronic databases (Medline, EMBASE and Web of Science) were search until February 17th, 2015 to identify relevant studies. Observational cohort studies or randomised intervention studies were eligible for inclusion if they followed participants prospectively (at least 1 year of follow-up), and reported relevant estimates on the association of any vasomotor symptoms, or other menopausal symptoms, with risk of CVD, coronary heart disease (CHD), or stroke in perimenopausal, menopausal, or postmenopausal women. Data were extracted by two independent reviewers using a pre-designed data collection form. Separate pooled relative risks (RRs) for age and non-established cardiovascular risk factors (e.g., education, ethnicity) adjusted data and for established cardiovascular risk factors and potential mediators-adjusted data (e.g., smoking, body mass index, and hypertension) were calculated. Out of 9,987 initially identified references, ten studies were selected, including 213,976 women with a total of 10,037 cardiovascular disease outcomes. The age and non-established cardiovascular risk factors adjusted RRs) [95% confidence intervals] for development of CHD, Stroke and CVD comparing women with and without any menopausal symptoms were 1.34 [1.13-1.58], 1.30 [0.99-1.70], 1.48 [1.21-1.80] respectively, and the corresponding RRs adjusted for cardiovascular risk factors and potential mediators were 1.18 [1.03-1.35], 1.08 [0.89-1.32], 1.29 [0.98-1.71]. However, these analyses were limited by potential unmeasured confounding and the small number of studies on this topic. Presence of vasomotor symptoms and other menopausal symptoms are generally associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular disease, which is mainly explained by cardiovascular risk factors.

The impact of non-communicable diseases (NCDs) in populations extends beyond ill-health and mortality with large financial consequences. To systematically review and meta-analyze studies evaluating the impact of NCDs (including coronary heart disease, stroke, type 2 diabetes mellitus, cancer (lung, colon, cervical and breast), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and chronic kidney disease) at the macro-economic level: healthcare spending and national income. Medical databases (Mediine, Embase and Google Scholar) up to November 6th 2014. For further identification of suitable studies, we searched reference lists of included studies and contacted experts in the field. We included randomized controlled trials, systematic reviews, cohorts, case-control, crosssectional, modeling and ecological studies carried out in adults assessing the economic consequences of NCDs on healthcare spending and national income without language restrictions. All abstracts and full text selection was done by two independent reviewers. Any disagreements were resolved through consensus or consultation of a third reviewer. Data were extracted by two independent reviewers using a pre-designed data collection form. Studies evaluating the impact of at least one of the selected NCDs on at least one of the following outcome measures: healthcare expenditure, national income, hospital spending, gross domestic product (GDP), gross national product, net national income, adjusted national income, total costs, direct costs, indirect costs, inpatient costs, outpatient costs, per capita healthcare spending, aggregate economic outcome, capital loss in production levels in a country, economic growth, GDP per capita (per capita income), percentage change in GDP, intensive growth, extensive growth, employment, direct governmental expenditure and non-governmental expenditure. From 4,364 references, 153 studies met our inclusion criteria. Most of the studies were focused on healthcare related costs of NCDs. 30 studies reported the economic impact of NCDs on healthcare budgets and 13 on national income. Healthcare expenditure for cardiovascular disease (12-16.5 %) was the highest; other NCDs ranged between 0.7 and 7.4 %. NCD-related healt costs vary across the countries, regions, and according to type of NCD. Additionally, there is an increase in costs with increased severity and years lived with the disease. Low- and middle-income (LMI) countries were the focus of just 16 papers, which suggests an information shortage concerning the true economic burden of NCDs in these countries. NCDs pose a significant financial burden on healthcare budgets and nations' welfare, which is likely to increase over time. However further work is required to standardize more consistently the methods available to assess the economic impact of NCDs and to involve (hitherto under-addressed) LMI populations across the globe.

Background Single group data present unique challenges for synthesises of evidence. Proportional meta-analysis is becoming an increasingly common technique employed for the synthesis of single group data. Proportional meta-analysis shares many similarities with the conduct and reporting of comparative, or pairwise, meta-analysis. While robust and comprehensive methods exist detailing how researchers can conduct a meta-analysis that compares two (or more) groups against a common intervention, there is a scarcity of methodological guidance available to assist synthesisers of evidence in the conduct, interpretation, and importance of proportional meta-analysis in systematic reviews. Main body This paper presents an overview targeted to synthesisers of evidence and systematic review authors that details the methods, importance, and interpretation of a proportional meta-analysis. We provide worked examples of how proportional meta-analyses have been conducted in research syntheses previously and consider the methods, statistical considerations, and presentation of this technique. Conclusion This overview is designed to serve as practical guidance for synthesisers of evidence in the conduct of proportional meta-analyses.

The global economic impact of non-communicable diseases (NCDs) on household expenditures and poverty indicators remains less well understood. To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature evaluating the global economic impact of six NCDs [including coronary heart disease, stroke, type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM), cancer (lung, colon, cervical and breast), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and chronic kidney disease (CKD)] on households and impoverishment. Medline, Embase and Google Scholar databases were searched from inception to November 6th 2014. To identify additional publications, reference lists of retrieved studies were searched. Randomized controlled trials, systematic reviews, cohorts, case-control, cross-sectional, modeling and ecological studies carried out in adults and assessing the economic consequences of NCDs on households and impoverishment. No language restrictions. All abstract and full text selection was done by two independent reviewers. Data were extracted by two independent reviewers and checked by a third independent reviewer. Studies were included evaluating the impact of at least one of the selected NCDs and on at least one of the following measures: expenditure on medication, transport, co-morbidities, out-of-pocket (OOP) payments or other indirect costs; impoverishment, poverty line and catastrophic spending; household or individual financial cost. From 3,241 references, 64 studies met the inclusion criteria, 75 % of which originated from the Americas and Western Pacific WHO region. Breast cancer and DM were the most studied NCDs (42 in total); CKD and COPD were the least represented (five and three studies respectively). OOP payments and financial catastrophe, mostly defined as OOP exceeding a certain proportion of household income, were the most studied outcomes. OOP expenditure as a proportion of family income, ranged between 2 and 158 % across the different NCDs and countries. Financial catastrophe due to the selected NCDs was seen in all countries and at all income levels, and occurred in 6-84 % of the households depending on the chosen catastrophe threshold. In 16 low- and middle-income countries (LMIC), 6-11 % of the total population would be impoverished at a 1.25 US dollar/day poverty line if they would have to purchase lowest price generic diabetes medication. NCDs impose a large and growing global impact on households and impoverishment, in all continents and levels of income. The true extent, however, remains difficult to determine due to the heterogeneity across existing studies in terms of populations studied, outcomes reported and measures employed. The impact that NCDs exert on households and impoverishment is likely to be underestimated since important economic domains, such as coping strategies and the inclusion of marginalized and vulnerable people who do not seek health care due to financial reasons, are overlooked in literature. Given the scarcity of information on specific regions, further research to estimate impact of NCDs on households and impoverishment in LMIC, especially the Middle Eastern, African and Latin American regions is required.

Non-communicable diseases (NCDs) have large economic impact at multiple levels. To systematically review the literature investigating the economic impact of NCDs [including coronary heart disease (CHD), stroke, type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM), cancer (lung, colon, cervical and breast), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and chronic kidney disease (CKD)] on macro-economic productivity. Systematic search, up to November 6th 2014, of medical databases (Mediine, Embase and Google Scholar) without language restrictions. To identify additional publications, we searched the reference lists of retrieved studies and contacted authors in the field. Randomized controlled trials, cohort, case-control, cross-sectional, ecological studies and modelling studies carried out in adults (>18 years old) were included. Two independent reviewers performed all abstract and full text selection. Disagreements were resolved through consensus or consulting a third reviewer. Two independent reviewers extracted data using a predesigned data collection form. Main outcome measure was the impact of the selected NCDs on productivity, measured in DALYs, productivity costs, and labor market participation, including unemployment, return to work and sick leave. From 4542 references, 126 studies met the inclusion criteria, many of which focused on the impact of more than one NCD on productivity. Breast cancer was the most common (n = 45), followed by stroke (n = 31), COPD (n = 24), colon cancer (n = 24), DM (n = 22), lung cancer (n = 16), CVD (n = 15), cervical cancer (n = 7) and CKD (n = 2). Four studies were from the WHO African Region, 52 from the European Region, 53 from the Region of the Americas and 16 from the Western Pacific Region, one from the Eastern Mediterranean Region and none from South East Asia. We found large regional differences in DALYs attributable to NCDs but especially for cervical and lung cancer. Productivity losses in the USA ranged from 88 million US dollars (USD) for COPD to 20.9 billion USD for colon cancer. CHD costs the Australian economy 13.2 billion USD per year. People with DM, COPD and survivors of breast and especially lung cancer are at a higher risk of reduced labor market participation. Overall NCDs generate a large impact on macro-economic productivity in most WHO regions irrespective of continent and income. The absolute global impact in terms of dollars and DALYs remains an elusive challenge due to the wide heterogeneity in the included studies as well as limited information from lowand middle-income countries.

Background There is a notable lack of methodological and reporting guidance for systematic reviews of prevalence data. This information void has the potential to result in reviews that are inconsistent and inadequate to inform healthcare policy and decision making. The aim of this meta-epidemiological study is to describe the methodology of recently published prevalence systematic reviews. Methods We searched MEDLINE (via PubMed) from February 2017 to February 2018 for systematic reviews of prevalence studies. We included systematic reviews assessing the prevalence of any clinical condition using patients as the unit of measurement and we summarized data related to reporting and methodology of the reviews. Results A total of 235 systematic reviews of prevalence were analyzed. The median number of authors was 5 (interquartile range [IQR] 4–7), the median number of databases searched was 4 (3–6) and the median number of studies included in each review was 24 (IQR 15–41.5). Search strategies were presented for 68% of reviews. Forty five percent of reviews received external funding, and 24% did not provide funding information. Twenty three percent of included reviews had published or registered the systematic review protocol. Reporting guidelines were used in 72% of reviews. The quality of included studies was assessed in 80% of reviews. Nine reviews assessed the overall quality of evidence (4 using GRADE). Meta-analysis was conducted in 65% of reviews; 1% used Bayesian methods. Random effect meta-analysis was used in 94% of reviews; among them, 75% did not report the variance estimator used. Among the reviews with meta-analysis, 70% did not report how data was transformed; 59% percent conducted subgroup analysis, 38% conducted meta-regression and 2% estimated prediction interval; I 2 was estimated in 95% of analysis. Publication bias was examined in 48%. The most common software used was STATA (55%). Conclusions Our results indicate that there are significant inconsistencies regarding how these reviews are conducted. Many of these differences arose in the assessment of methodological quality and the formal synthesis of comparable data. This variability indicates the need for clearer reporting standards and consensus on methodological guidance for systematic reviews of prevalence data.

Background: Brazil’s dietary patterns and significant socioeconomic and geographic diversity present unique challenges for the prevention of cardiometabolic diseases. Methods: In this cross-sectional study, we analyzed data from a nationwide representative survey to understand how dietary patterns related to cardiometabolic diseases. We classified the dietary pattern of participants as whole plant-based, processed plant-based, and animal-based. Then, they were categorized into high, intermediate, and low consumption. Logistic regression analysis was used to test the prevalence of obesity, hypertension, hypercholesterolemia, diabetes, stroke, and heart diseases according to the level of intake of each of the three dietary patterns. Results: Compared to the low intake of a whole plant-based dietary pattern, a high intake was associated with a lower prevalence of obesity (OR 0.64; 95% CI 0.54, 0.75) and hypercholesterolemia (OR 0.69, 95% CI 0.56, 0.85). A processed plant-based dietary pattern (including items such as soda and sweets) was inversely associated with the prevalence of obesity (OR 0.90; 95% CI 0.83, 0.97), hypertension (OR 0.82; 95% CI 0.76, 0.88), hypercholesterolemia (OR 0.81; 95% CI 0.74, 0.88), and diabetes (OR 0.53; 95% CI 0.48, 0.59). A high intake of animal-based dietary patterns was associated with a lower prevalence of heart diseases (OR: 0.60; 95% CI 0.40, 0.90). Conclusions: In this cross-sectional analysis, greater adherence to specific dietary patterns was associated with differences in the prevalence of cardiometabolic conditions. However, causality cannot be established, and longitudinal studies are warranted to confirm these findings.

Background Aging and menopause are particular cardiovascular risk factors for women, due to estrogen deprivation at the time of menopause. Studies show that diabetes mellitus (DM), smoking, hypertension, high body mass index (BMI), and serum lipids are associated with increased risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD), the main cause of female mortality in Brazil. The aim of this study was to assess the mortality rate, causes of death and associated risk factors in a cohort of women from Brazil. Methods A longitudinal population-based study of menopausal status is currently underway in a city in South Brazil. In 2010, a third follow-up of this population was performed to assess cardiovascular risk and mortality rate between 1995 and 2011. For this analysis, 358 participants were studied. At baseline, participants had completed a standardized questionnaire including demographic, lifestyle, medical and reproductive characteristics. In addition to the contacts with relatives, mortality data were obtained through review of medical records in all city hospitals and the Center for Health Information (NIS/RS-SES). Multivariate-adjusted hazard risk (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI95%) were estimated using Cox proportional hazards regression. Survival curves were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier curve. Results There were 17 (4.7%) deaths from all causes during the study period. Seven (41.2%) deaths were caused by CVD, including four cases of stroke and three cases of myocardial infarction. Six (35.3%) deaths were due to cancer, and four (23.5%) were due to other reasons. In the age and smoking-adjusted multivariate models, diabetes (HR 6.645, 95% CI: 1.938–22.79, p = 0.003), alcohol intake (HR 1.228, 95% CI: 1.014-1.487, p = 0.035) and postmenopausal status (HR = 6.216, 95% CI: 0.963–40.143, p = 0.055) were associated with all-cause mortality. A significant association was found between abdominal obesity (WHR ≥ 0.85) and mortality even after the adjustment for BMI (HR = 9.229, 95% IC: 2.083–41.504, p = 0.003). Conclusion CVD was an important cause of mortality in this cohort and DM and/or central adiposity were associated with all-cause mortality. Lifestyle and dietary factors seem to be related to risk of mortality in middle-aged women.

This study aimed to estimate the prevalence of genital, anal and oral HPV infection in Brazil through systematic review and meta-analysis. We searched EMBASE, LILACS, MEDLINE, Web of Science and SciELO from inception to December 2018. Original research articles that assessed the prevalence of genital (i.e., cervical, penile), anal and oral HPV infection in Brazil were selected in pairs by independent authors. No sex, age, HPV vaccination, language or date restrictions were applied. HPV prevalence was estimated and stratified according to risk factors population and by geographic area throughout the country. The study prevalence was pooled using a random effects model. Analysis was performed using R (version 3.5.2), packages meta version 4.9-4 and metaphor 2.0-0. This review is registered on PROSPERO under protocol number CRD42016032751. We identified 3,351 references. After the screening process, 139 of them were eligible for this systematic review (57,513 total participants). Prevalence of cervical HPV was 25.41% (95% CI 22.71-28.32). Additionally, prevalence was 36.21% (95% CI 23.40, 51.33) in the penile region, 25.68% (95%CI 14.64, 41.04) in the anal region, and 11.89% (95%CI 6.26, 21.43) in the oral region. Subgroup analysis showed prevalence in each anatomic site was higher in high-risk populations. The prevalence of HPV is high in the Brazilian population and varies by population risk and anatomic body site, with lower rates in the oral cavity compared to that in the cervical, penile and anal region. Studies on HPV have primarily been developed to evaluate infection and cancer in the cervical region. There is a profound lack of HPV data in many geographic regions of Brazil and for different anatomic sites.