Fear in animals: a meta-analysis and review of risk assessment.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Stankowich T
PROVIDER: S-EPMC1559976 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:ObjectiveEven though 32%-83% for fear of falling (FoF) in patients with stroke, very little is known about the predictors of the problems. Therefore, we systematically reviewed the literature on risk factors for FoF in patients with stroke.DesignA systematic review and meta-analysis DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library database, Web of Science, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Grey literature and other relevant databases for related publications were searched (from inception to 17 July 2021).ResultsEight studies involving 1597 participants were selected to analyse risk factors for patients with stroke with FoF. The quality of all included studies was assessed and categorised as medium or high quality. Review Manager V.5.3 merged the OR value and 95% CI of the potential risk factors. Meta-regression and Egger's test were performed by Stata V.15.1. The risk factors for FoF in patients with stroke were women (OR=2.13, 95% CI 1.47 to 3.09), impaired balance ability (OR=5.54; 95% CI 3.48 to 8.81), lower mobility (OR=1.12; 95% CI 1.05 to 1.19), history of falls (OR=2.33; 95% CI 1.54 to 3.53) and walking aid (OR=1.98; 95% CI 1.37 to 2.88), anxiety (OR=2.29; 95% CI 1.43 to 3.67), depression (OR=1.80; 95% CI 1.22 to 2.67), poor lower limb motor function (OR=1.14; 95% CI 1.00 to 1.29) and physically inactiveness (OR=2.04; 95% CI 1.01 to 4.12). Measurement of heterogeneity between studies was high for all outcomes (I2 =0%-93%), indicating that the substantial interstudy heterogeneity in estimated proportions was not attributed to the sampling error. Sensitivity analysis (leave-one-out method) showed that the pooled estimate was stable.ConclusionThis meta-analysis indicated that female population, impaired balance ability, lower mobility, history of falls and walking aid in patients with stroke might be at greater risk for FoF. Future studies are recommended to determine other risk factors specific to patients with stroke.
| S-EPMC9247667 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background: Due to lack of preparedness of health systems, fast spread of the new virus, high mortality rates, and lack of a definite treatment, the outbreak of Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) led to high levels of fear and anxiety in different populations. In addition, isolation, mental disorders, and limitations in social interactions as a result of lockdown and travel ban increased the fear of the new coronavirus. Methods: International databases, including Scopus, PubMed, Web of Science, and Google scholar, were searched without any time limitation, and all observational studies published in English reporting the mean of fear of COVID-19 based on the Fear of COVID-19 scale (FCV-19S) were included in the analysis. Methodological quality was assessed using the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) guidelines. Random effects model, subgroup analysis, and meta-regression analysis were used to analyze the data. Heterogeneity across studies was examined using Cochran's Q test and I 2 statistic. All the statistical analyses were conducted using R software v4.0.3. Results: A total of 44 articles with a sample size of 52,462 were reviewed. A pooled mean of 18.57 was found for fear of COVID-19. The mean of fear of COVID-19 was higher in women than in men (20.67 vs. 18.21). The highest and lowest means of fear of COVID-19 had been found in Asia (18.36) and Australia (17.43) based on continent, and in hospital staff (19.51) and college students (17.95) based on target population, respectively. In addition, the highest and lowest means of fear of COVID-19 were related to items #1 and #3 of the scale, respectively. According to the results of meta-regression analysis, there was no significant association between the mean of fear of COVID-19 and sample size and participants' age. In addition, publication error was not significant (P = 0.721). Conclusion: The mean of fear of COVID-19 was high around the world; therefore, it seems necessary to pay more attention to the negative effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on mental health.
| S-EPMC8231929 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Various financial and non-financial conflicts of interests have been shown to influence the reporting of research findings, particularly in clinical medicine. In this study, we examine whether this extends to prognostic instruments designed to assess violence risk. Such instruments have increasingly become a routine part of clinical practice in mental health and criminal justice settings. The present meta-analysis investigated whether an authorship effect exists in the violence risk assessment literature by comparing predictive accuracy outcomes in studies where the individuals who designed these instruments were study authors with independent investigations. A systematic search from 1966 to 2011 was conducted using PsycINFO, EMBASE, MEDLINE, and US National Criminal Justice Reference Service Abstracts to identify predictive validity studies for the nine most commonly used risk assessment tools. Tabular data from 83 studies comprising 104 samples was collected, information on two-thirds of which was received directly from study authors for the review. Random effects subgroup analysis and metaregression were used to explore evidence of an authorship effect. We found a substantial and statistically significant authorship effect. Overall, studies authored by tool designers reported predictive validity findings around two times higher those of investigations reported by independent authors (DOR=6.22 [95% CI=4.68-8.26] in designers' studies vs. DOR=3.08 [95% CI=2.45-3.88] in independent studies). As there was evidence of an authorship effect, we also examined disclosure rates. None of the 25 studies where tool designers or translators were also study authors published a conflict of interest statement to that effect, despite a number of journals requiring that potential conflicts be disclosed. The field of risk assessment would benefit from routine disclosure and registration of research studies. The extent to which similar conflict of interests exists in those developing risk assessment guidelines and providing expert testimony needs clarification.
| S-EPMC3759386 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeSuicide is a major cause of preventable death worldwide. Adequate training in risk assessment and intervention is key to suicide prevention. The use of simulation (role plays, simulated patients, virtual reality…) for practical training is a promising tool in mental health. The purpose of this study was to assess the effectiveness of simulation training in suicide risk assessment and intervention for healthcare professionals and gatekeepers.MethodsWe conducted a systematic review in Medline and PsycINFO up to 31 July 2021 of randomized controlled trials (RCTs), non-randomized controlled trials, and pre/post-test studies. RCTs were furthermore included in a meta-analysis. We assessed the methodological quality of all studies with the Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument, and the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool 2.0 for RCTs. Primary outcomes were changes in Kirkpatrick criteria: attitudes, skills, knowledge, behaviors, and patient outcomes.ResultsWe included 96 articles representing 43,656 participants. Most pre/post-test (n = 65) and non-randomized controlled (n = 14) studies showed significant improvement in attitudes, skills, knowledge, and behaviors. The meta-analysis of 11 RCTs showed positive changes in attitudes immediately after training and at 2-4 months post-training; in self-perceived skills at 6 months post-training; but not in factual knowledge. Studies assessing benefits for patients are still limited.ConclusionsThe heterogeneity of methodological designs, interventions, and trained populations combined with a limited number of RCTs and studies on patients' outcomes limit the strength of the evidence. However, preliminary findings suggest that simulation is promising for practical training in suicidal crisis intervention and should be further studied.
| S-EPMC10120456 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAlthough structured tools have been widely used to predict violence risk in specialist mental health settings, there is uncertainty about the extent and quality of evidence of their predictive performance. We aimed to systematically review the predictive performance of tools used to assess violence risk in forensic mental health, where they are routinely administered.MethodsIn our systematic review and meta-analysis, we followed PRISMA guidelines and searched four databases (PsycINFO, Embase, Medline, and Global Health) from database inception to Nov 1, 2022, to identify studies examining the predictive performance of risk assessment tools in people discharged from forensic (secure) mental health hospitals. Systematic and narrative reviews were excluded from the review. Performance measures and descriptive statistics were extracted from published reports. A quality assessment was performed for each study using the Prediction Model Risk of Bias Assessment Tool. Meta-analysis was conducted on the performance of instruments that were independently externally validated with a sample size greater than 100. The study was registered with PROSPERO, CRD42022304716.FindingsWe conducted a systematic review of 50 eligible publications, assessing the predictive performance of 36 tools, providing data for 10 460 participants (88% men, 12% women; median age [from 47 studies] was 35 years, IQR 33-38) from 12 different countries. Post-discharge interpersonal violence and crime was most often measured by new criminal offences or recidivism (47 [94%] of 50 studies); only three studies used informant or self-report data on physical aggression or violent behaviour. Overall, the predictive performance of risk assessment tools was mixed. Most studies reported one discrimination metric, the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC); other key performance measures such as calibration, sensitivity, and specificity were not presented. Most studies had a high risk of bias (49 [98%] of 50), partly due to poor analytical approaches. A meta-analysis was conducted for violent recidivism on 29 independent external validations from 19 studies with at least 100 patients. Pooled AUCs for predicting violent outcomes ranged from 0·72 (0·65-0·79; I2=0%) for H10, to 0·69 for the Historical Clinical Risk Management-20 version 2 (95% CI 0·65-0·72; I2=0%) and Violence Risk Appraisal Guide (0·63-0·75; I2=0%), to 0·64 for the Static-99 (0·53-0·73; I2=45%).InterpretationCurrent violence risk assessment tools in forensic mental health have mixed evidence of predictive performance. Forensic mental health services should review their use of current risk assessment tools and consider implementing those with higher-quality evidence in support.FundingWellcome Trust.
| S-EPMC10914679 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAs a common psychological problem among older adults, fear of falling was found to have a wide range prevalence in different studies. However, the global prevalence of it was unknown and a lack of the large sample confirmed its risk factors.ObjectivesTo report the global prevalence of fear of falling and to explore its risk factors among older adults for further developing precise interventions to systematically manage FOF.DesignA systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted by PRISMA guidelines.MethodsSearches were conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library and the manual search in August 20, 2022, updated to September 2, 2023. Observational studies published in English were included and two researchers independently screened and extracted the data. Fixed or random effects mode was used to estimate the pooled prevalence of and risk factors for fear of falling. Heterogeneity resources were analyzed by subgroup and sensitivity analysis. Publication bias was assessed through funnel plots, Egger's test and Begg's test.ResultsA total of the 153 studies with 200,033 participants from 38 countries worldwide were identified. The global prevalence of fear of falling was 49.60%, ranging from 6.96-90.34%. Subgroup analysis found the estimates pooled prevalence of it was higher in developing countries (53.40%) than in developed countries (46.7%), and higher in patients (52.20%) than in community residents (48.40%). In addition, twenty-eight risk factors were found a significant associations with fear of falling, mainly including demographic characteristics, physical function, chronic diseases and mental problems.ConclusionThe global prevalence of FOF was high, especially in developing countries and in patients. Demographic characteristics, Physical function, chronic diseases and mental problems were a significant association with FOF. Policy-makers, health care providers and government officials should comprehensively evaluate these risk factors and formulate precise intervention measures to reduce FOF.Trial registrationThe study was registered in the International Database of Prospectively Registered Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO): CRD42022358031.
| S-EPMC10998426 | biostudies-literature
Project description:MiRNA polymorphisms had potential to be biomarkers for hepatocellular cancer (HCC) susceptibility. Recently, miRNA single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) were reported to be associated with HCC risk, but the results were inconsistent. We performed a systematic review with a meta-analysis for the association of miRNA SNPs with HCC risk. Thirty-seven studies were included with a total of 11821 HCC patients and 15359 controls in this meta-analysis. We found hsa-mir-146a rs2910164 was associated with a decreased HCC risk in the recessive model (P=0.017, OR = 0.90, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.83-0.98). While hsa-mir-34b/c rs4938723 was related with an increased HCC risk in the co-dominant model (P=0.016, odds ratio (OR) = 1.19, 95%CI = 1.03-1.37). When analyzing the Hepatitis B virus (HBV)-related HCC risk, hsa-mir-196a-2 rs11614913 was associated with a decreased HBV-related HCC risk in the co-dominant and allelic models. And hsa-mir-149 rs2292832 was found to be associated with a decreased HBV-related HCC risk in the dominant and recessive models. In conclusion, hsa-mir-146a rs2910164 and hsa-mir-34b/c rs4938723 could be biomarkers for the HCC risk while hsa-mir-196a-2 rs11614913 and hsa-mir-149 rs2292832 had potential to be biomarkers for HBV-related HCC risk.
| S-EPMC6153371 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundMental health issue among college students is routinely a major public health concern, and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic may have exacerbated the students' mental health issues which include psychological distress, panic disorder, insomnia, and posttraumatic stress symptoms. However, few studies reached a consensus on the impact of COVID-19 fear on mental health among college students. Therefore, we aimed to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis that quantitatively synthesized the fear among college students during the COVID-19 pandemic.MethodsPubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, and PsycINFO electronic databases were systematically searched to identify cross-sectional study reporting the state of COVID-19 fear examined by the Fear of COVID-19 Scale (FCV-19S) published up until November 20, 2021. Methodological quality was complied with the evaluation criteria of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. The random effects model was employed to estimate the pooled mean of FCV-19S score. Subgroup analysis and meta-regression analysis were also conducted. Publication bias was assessed by Begg's test and funnel plot.ResultsA total of 16 studies with a sample size of 11,872 were included. A pooled mean of FCV-19S score was 17.60 [95% confidence interval (CI): 16.41-18.78]. The mean of COVID-19 fear in women (17.11, 95% CI: 16.59-17.64) was higher than that in men (15.21, 95% CI: 14.33-16.08). The highest and lowest pooled means of FCV-19S score were observed in the studies conducted in multiple countries that include Israel, Russian, and Belarus (21.55, 95% CI: 20.77-22.33) and in Europe (16.52, 95% CI: 15.26-17.77), respectively. No significant publication bias was detected by Begg's test.ConclusionsCollege students experienced a moderate level of fear caused by COVID-19 pandemic. It is necessary to design and implement prevention programs that target the mental health of college students.Systematic review registrationhttps://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42021287017, identifier: CRD42021287017.
| S-EPMC8921101 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Primary outcome(s): Colorectal cancer incidence, Colorectal tumor incidence
| 79216 | ecrin-mdr-crc
Project description:ObjectiveTo conduct a systematic review of pain anxiety, pain catastrophizing, and fear of pain measures psychometrically established in youth with chronic pain. The review addresses three specific aims: (1) to identify measures used in youth with chronic pain, summarizing their content, psychometric properties, and use; (2) to use evidence-based assessment criteria to rate each measure according to the Society of Pediatric Psychology (SPP) guidelines; (3) to pool data across studies for meta-analysis of shared variance in psychometric performance in relation to the primary outcomes of pain intensity, disability, generalized anxiety, and depression.MethodsWe searched Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, and relevant literature for possible studies to include. We identified measures studied in youth with chronic pain that assessed pain anxiety, pain catastrophizing, or fear of pain and extracted the item-level content. Study and participant characteristics, and correlation data were extracted for summary and meta-analysis, and measures were rated using the SPP evidence-based assessment criteria.ResultsFifty-four studies (84 papers) met the inclusion criteria, including seven relevant measures: one assessed pain anxiety, three pain catastrophizing, and three fear of pain. Overall, five measures were rated as "well established." We conducted meta-analyses on four measures with available data. We found significant positive correlations with the variables pain intensity, disability, generalized anxiety, and depression.ConclusionSeven measures are available to assess pain anxiety, pain catastrophizing, and fear of pain in young people with chronic pain, and most are well established. We present implications for practice and directions for future research.
| S-EPMC6927870 | biostudies-literature