Association between thyroid disorders and COVID-19: a protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background
The novel coronavirus (COVID-19) epidemic initially appeared in Wuhan, Hubei Province, China, on 31 December 2019 and was spread rapidly worldwide. Most underlying diseases reported with COVID-19 patients are diabetes, hypertension, coronary heart diseases, and cerebrovascular disease. We do not know whether individuals with thyroid disease are at increased risk of COVID-19 infection.Methods
Two experienced researchers will conduct an electronic search of the databases including PubMed/MEDLINE, the Cochrane Reviews, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Web of Science, Scopus, and ProQuest, for articles published since October 2019. Clinical trials and observational studies will be included. Studies will be screened after de-duplication. A standardized data extraction form will be developed through discussions with the review team and will be revised after piloting. An appropriate risk of bias assessment tool will be used to assess the quality of studies. Two independent reviewers will assess the eligibility, extraction of detailed information, and quality assessment of studies. The results will be pooled for meta-analysis, subgroup analysis and/or descriptive analysis based on the included data conditions.Conclusion
Results of this study will provide current evidence on the association of COVID-19 diseases with any thyroid disorders such as hypothyroidism, thyrotoxicosis, and thyroid cancer with or without radioiodine therapy. Findings will be disseminated in peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations.Trial registration
PROSPERO registration number: CRD42020184289. https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/#recordDetails.
SUBMITTER: Doustmohammadian S
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8479499 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:ImportancePreexisting noncommunicable diseases (eg, diabetes) increase the risk of COVID-19 infection, hospitalization, and death. Mood disorders are associated with impaired immune function and social determinants that increase the risk of COVID-19. Determining whether preexisting mood disorders represent a risk of COVID-19 would inform public health priorities.ObjectiveTo assess whether preexisting mood disorders are associated with a higher risk of COVID-19 susceptibility, hospitalization, severe complications, and death.Data sourcesSystematic searches were conducted for studies reporting data on COVID-19 outcomes in populations with and without mood disorders on PubMed/MEDLINE, The Cochrane Library, PsycInfo, Embase, Web of Science, Google/Google Scholar, LitCovid, and select reference lists. The search timeline was from database inception to February 1, 2021.Study selectionPrimary research articles that reported quantitative COVID-19 outcome data in persons with mood disorders vs persons without mood disorders of any age, sex, and nationality were selected. Of 1950 articles identified through this search strategy, 21 studies were included in the analysis.Data extraction and synthesisThe modified Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to assess methodological quality and risk of bias of component studies. Reported adjusted odds ratios (ORs) were pooled with unadjusted ORs calculated from summary data to generate 4 random-effects summary ORs, each corresponding to a primary outcome.Main outcomes and measuresThe 4 a priori primary outcomes were COVID-19 susceptibility, COVID-19 hospitalization, COVID-19 severe events, and COVID-19 death. The hypothesis was formulated before study search. Outcome measures between individuals with and without mood disorders were compared.ResultsThis review included 21 studies that involved more than 91 million individuals. Significantly higher odds of COVID-19 hospitalization (OR, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.12-1.53; P = .001; n = 26 554 397) and death (OR, 1.51; 95% CI, 1.34-1.69; P < .001; n = 25 808 660) were found in persons with preexisting mood disorders compared with those without mood disorders. There was no association between mood disorders and COVID-19 susceptibility (OR, 1.27; 95% CI, 0.73-2.19; n = 65 514 469) or severe events (OR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.87-1.03; n = 83 240). Visual inspection of the composite funnel plot for asymmetry indicated the presence of publication bias; however, the Egger regression intercept test result was not statistically significant.Conclusions and relevanceThe results of this systematic review and meta-analysis examining the association between preexisting mood disorders and COVID-19 outcomes suggest that individuals with preexisting mood disorders are at higher risk of COVID-19 hospitalization and death and should be categorized as an at-risk group on the basis of a preexisting condition.
| S-EPMC8319830 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionCOVID-19 infections have become an urgent worldwide public health concern. Although it is primarily a respiratory disease, up to two-thirds of hospitalised COVID-19 patients exhibit nervous system damage and an increased risk of frailty. In this study,we aim to investigate the relationship between frailty and cognitive function disorders in patients with COVID-19 with a systematic review and meta-analysis approach.Methods and analysisThis meta-analysis has been registered by the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews. We will search for relevant studies from PubMed, Embase, Chinese Biological Medical Database, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang Database, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases, from their inception to 5 July 2021. We will also search reference lists of selected articles for additional studies. Our search strategy will have no language restrictions. We will employ a fixed or random-effects model to calculate OR and 95% CIs for pooled data, and assess heterogeneity using Cochrane's Q and I2 tests. The primary outcome will be the rate of cognitive disorders related to frailty in old patients with COVID-19.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval is not essential since data will be extracted from previously published studies. The results of this meta-analysis will be published in a peer-reviewed journal.Prospero registration numberCRD42021257148.
| S-EPMC8895415 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesThe purpose of this study was to compare and determine whether there were any differences in clinical outcomes between pregnant and non-pregnant women who had been infected with COVID-19.MethodsA literature search was performed in 9 databases on November 20, 2021. The relative risk (RR) with 95% confidence interval (95% CI) was used to estimate the effect of pregnancy on COVID-19 outcomes. The I square value was used to assess heterogeneity, and the random or the fixed-effects model were adopted. Sensitivity and publication bias analyses were performed.ResultsThis study included 8 published studies with 859,278 COVID-19 female patients. The incidences of fever and cough among pregnant women with COVID-19 were 19.07% and 28.79%, respectively. Pregnancy was associated with significantly increased risks of intensive care unit (ICU) admission (RR = 2.23, 95% CI = 1.58-3.16) and ventilation (RR = 2.13, 95% CI = 1.06-4.28), but was not associated with a statistically significant increase in mortality.ConclusionsOur results suggest that pregnant women with COVID-19 have a significantly higher probability of being hospitalized to the ICU and ventilation than non-pregnant women with COVID-19. To avoid these adverse outcomes, pregnant women should take precautions (for example, reduce going out, maintain social distance, and wear a mask) to avoid COVID-19 infection. Finally, additional research into the fetal outcomes is required to better investigate the impact of COVID-19 on pregnancy.
| S-EPMC8986277 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceHeterogeneous evidence exists for the association between COVID-19 and the clinical outcomes of patients with mental health disorders. It remains unknown whether patients with COVID-19 and mental health disorders are at increased risk of mortality and should thus be targeted as a high-risk population for severe forms of COVID-19.ObjectiveTo determine whether patients with mental health disorders were at increased risk of COVID-19 mortality compared with patients without mental health disorders.Data sourcesFor this systematic review and meta-analysis, MEDLINE, Web of Science, and Google Scholar were searched from inception to February 12, 2021. Bibliographies were also searched, and the corresponding authors were directly contacted. The search paradigm was based on the following combination: (mental, major[MeSH terms]) AND (COVID-19 mortality[MeSH terms]). To ensure exhaustivity, the term mental was replaced by psychiatric, schizophrenia, psychotic, bipolar disorder, mood disorders, major depressive disorder, anxiety disorder, personality disorder, eating disorder, alcohol abuse, alcohol misuse, substance abuse, and substance misuse.Study selectionEligible studies were population-based cohort studies of all patients with identified COVID-19 exploring the association between mental health disorders and mortality.Data extraction and synthesisPreferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) reporting guideline was used for abstracting data and assessing data quality and validity. This systematic review is registered with PROSPERO.Main outcomes and measuresPooled crude and adjusted odds ratios (ORs) for the association of mental health disorders with mortality were calculated using a 3-level random-effects (study/country) approach with a hierarchical structure to assess effect size dependency.ResultsIn total, 16 population-based cohort studies (data from medico-administrative health or electronic/medical records databases) across 7 countries (1 from Denmark, 2 from France, 1 from Israel, 3 from South Korea, 1 from Spain, 1 from the UK, and 7 from the US) and 19 086 patients with mental health disorders were included. The studies covered December 2019 to July 2020, were of good quality, and no publication bias was identified. COVID-19 mortality was associated with an increased risk among patients with mental health disorders compared with patients without mental health disorders according to both pooled crude OR (1.75 [95% CI, 1.40-2.20]; P < .05) and adjusted OR (1.38 [95% CI, 1.15-1.65]; P < .05). The patients with severe mental health disorders had the highest ORs for risk of mortality (crude OR: 2.26 [95% CI, 1.18-4.31]; adjusted OR: 1.67 [95% CI, 1.02-2.73]).Conclusions and relevanceIn this systematic review and meta-analysis of 16 observational studies in 7 countries, mental health disorders were associated with increased COVID-19-related mortality. Thus, patients with mental health disorders should have been targeted as a high-risk population for severe forms of COVID-19, requiring enhanced preventive and disease management strategies. Future studies should more accurately evaluate the risk for patients with each mental health disorder. However, the highest risk seemed to be found in studies including individuals with schizophrenia and/or bipolar disorders.
| S-EPMC8317055 | biostudies-literature
Project description:OBJECTIVES:This article evaluates if ethnicity is an independent poor prognostic factor in COVID-19 disease. METHODS:MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane, WHO COVID-19 databases from inception to 15/06/2020 and medRxiv. No language restriction. Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) and GRADE framework were utilised to assess the risk of bias and certainty of evidence. PROSPERO CRD42020188421. RESULTS:Seventy-two articles (59 cohort studies with 17,950,989 participants, 13 ecological studies; 54 US-based, 15 UK-based; 41 peer-reviewed) were included for systematic review and 45 for meta-analyses. Risk of bias was low: median NOS 7 of 9 (interquartile range 6-8). Compared to White ethnicity, unadjusted all-cause mortality was similar in Black (RR: 0.96 [95% CI: 0.83-1.08]) and Asian (RR: 0.99 [0.85-1.16]) but reduced in Hispanic ethnicity (RR: 0.69 [0.57-0.84]). Age- and sex-adjusted risks were significantly elevated for Black (HR: 1.38 [1.09-1.75]) and Asian (HR: 1.42 [1.15-1.75]), but not for Hispanic (RR: 1.14 [0.93-1.40]). Further adjusting for comorbidities attenuated these associations to non-significance: Black (HR: 0.95 [0.72-1.25]); Asian (HR: 1.17 [0.84-1.63]); Hispanic (HR: 0.94 [0.63-1.44]). Subgroup analyses showed a trend towards greater disparity in outcomes for UK ethnic minorities, especially hospitalisation risk. CONCLUSIONS:This review could not confirm a certain ethnicity as an independent poor prognostic factor for COVID-19. Racial disparities in COVID-19 outcomes may be partially attributed to higher comorbidity rates in certain ethnicity.
| S-EPMC7659894 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) is the most prevalent endocrine disorder affecting women of reproductive age. PCOS has been associated with distinct metabolic and cardiovascular diseases and with autoimmune conditions, predominantly autoimmune thyroid disease (AITD). AITD has been reported in 18-40% of PCOS women, depending on PCOS diagnostic criteria and ethnicity. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to summarize the available evidence regarding the likelihood of women with PCOS also having AITD in comparison to a reference group of non-PCOS women. We systematically searched EMBASE and MEDLINE for non-interventional case control, cross-sectional, or cohort studies published until August 2017. The Ottawa-Newcastle Scale was used to assess the methodological quality of studies. Statistical meta-analysis was performed with R. Thirteen studies were selected for the present analysis, including 1,210 women diagnosed with PCOS and 987 healthy controls. AITD was observed in 26.03% and 9.72% of PCOS and control groups respectively. A significant association was detected between PCOS and chance of AITD (OR= 3.27, 95%CI 2.32-4.63). Notably, after geographical stratification, the higher risk of AITD in PCOS women persisted for Asians (OR= 4.56, 95%CI 2.47-8.43), Europeans (OR= 3.27, 95%CI 2.07-5.15), and South Americans (OR= 1.86, 95 %CI 1.05-3.29). AIDT is a frequent condition in PCOS patients, and might affect thyroid function. Thus, screening for thyroid function and thyroid-specific autoantibodies should be considered in patients with PCOS even in the absence of overt symptoms. This systematic review and meta-analysis is registered in PROSPERO under number CRD42017079676.
| S-EPMC6215798 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundCystatin C (CysC) is often used to diagnose and monitor renal diseases. Although some studies have investigated the association between serum CysC levels and thyroid diseases, their reported results were inconsistent. Therefore, the relationship between CysC levels and thyroid diseases remains controversial.AimThis meta-analysis aimed to statistically evaluate serum CysC levels in patients with thyroid diseases.MethodsA literature search was conducted using the PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, EBSCO, and Wiley Online Library databases. The following search terms were used for the title or abstract: "Cystatin C" or "CysC" in combination with the terms "thyroid disease", "thyroid function", "hypothyroidism", or "hyperthyroidism". The results of the systematic analysis were presented as standardized mean differences (SMDs) with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs).ResultsEleven articles (1,265 cases and 894 controls) were included in the meta-analysis. The results of the meta-analysis showed that the serum CysC levels of patients with hyperthyroidism were significantly higher than those of the controls (SMD: 1.79, 95% CI [1.34, 2.25]), and the serum CysC levels of patients with hypothyroidism were significantly lower than those of the controls (SMD -0.59, 95% CI [-0.82, -0.36]). Moreover, the treatment of thyroid diseases significantly affected serum CysC levels.ConclusionsTo the best of our knowledge, this meta-analysis is the first to evaluate serum CysC levels in patients with thyroid diseases. Our findings suggest that thyroid function affects serum CysC levels and that serum CysC may be an effective marker for monitoring thyroid diseases.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO [https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?RecordID=258022], identifier CRD42021258022].
| S-EPMC8639734 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAs a product of adipose tissue, resistin exceeds other adipokines in its role in regulating appetite, energy expenditure, insulin sensitivity, inflammation, and immunity, similar to thyroid hormones. This study aimed to evaluate the association between resistin levels and thyroid dysfunction and to explore variations in circulating resistin levels before and after treatment for thyroid dysfunction.MethodsThis study was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis statement. A comprehensive search of PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases was conducted until June 15, 2022, with no start date restriction, according to the preregistered protocol (PROSPERO-CRD42022336617). RevMan version 5.4 and R software package version 4.2.0 were used for statistical analyses.ResultsFourteen studies with 1716 participants were included in this study. The findings of the meta-analysis confirmed that the resistin levels of patients with thyroid dysfunction were significantly higher than those of the euthyroid function control group (mean difference [MD] = 2.11, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.11-3.11, P < 0.00001). Furthermore, the resistin levels of patients with hyperthyroidism (MD = 3.23, 95% CI = 0.68-5.79, P = 0.01) and subclinical hypoidism (MD = 1.37, 95% CI = 0.31-2.42, P = 0.01) were significantly higher than those of euthyroid controls. The resistin levels of patients with thyroid dysfunction after treatment were significantly lower than those before treatment (MD = 1.00, 95% CI = 0.34-1.65, P = 0.003), especially in patients with hyperthyroidism (MD = 2.16, 95% CI = 1.00-3.32, P = 0.0003). Correlation analysis confirmed a positive correlation between resistin levels and free triiodothyronine (FT3) levels in patients with thyroid dysfunction (r = 0.27578, P = 0.001).ConclusionsOur meta-analysis demonstrates that resistin levels are significantly higher in patients with thyroid dysfunction, and the resistin levels after treatment in patients with thyroid dysfunction are significantly lower than those before treatment. Correlation analysis shows a positive correlation between resistin levels and FT3 levels in patients with thyroid dysfunction.Systematic review registrationhttps://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, identifier CRD42022336617.
| S-EPMC9845899 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveLoss 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 sourcesWe 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 methodsTwo 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.ResultsTwenty-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%).ConclusionsThe 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.
| S-EPMC7488903 | biostudies-literature
Project description:To explore and summarize the association between treatment with tocilizumab and clinical outcomes in COVID-19 patients. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis (10 RCTs including 3378 patients in the tocilizumab group and 3142 patients in the control group). We systematically searched PubMed and MedRxiv for all RCTs as of June 1, 2021, to assess the benefits and harms of tocilizumab to treat patients with COVID-19. All analyses were carried out using RevMan version 5.4.1. There were nine RCTs published in peer-reviewed journals and one RCTs published as a preprint. The summary RR for all-cause mortality with tocilizumab was 0.89 (95% CI= 0.82-0.96, P= 0.003). There was no significant between-trial heterogeneity (I2= 28%, P= 0.19). However, all peer-reviewed RCTs showed no significant associations between treatment with tocilizumab and reductions in all-cause mortality. We notably found that tocilizumab significantly reduced the rate of intubation or death in patients with COVID-19 with 3 RCTs. Across the 8 RCTs, the summary RR for discharge with tocilizumab was 1.10 (95% CI= 1.03-1.16, P< 0.00001). There was no significant association of tocilizumab with harm on other patient-relevant clinical outcomes, including increasing secondary infection risk, patients of adverse events, or patients of serious adverse events. Tocilizumab significantly increased the rate of hospital discharges in COVID-19 patients. Still, it did not decrease all-cause mortality or increase the risk of secondary infections, patients of adverse events, or patients for serious adverse events. Evidence that tocilizumab affects clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19 requires further proof.
| S-EPMC8833131 | biostudies-literature