-
Journal of Hazardous Materials Aug 2022Increasing usage of antimicrobials is a significant contributor to the emergence and dissemination of antimicrobial resistance. Wastewater-based epidemiology is a useful...
Increasing usage of antimicrobials is a significant contributor to the emergence and dissemination of antimicrobial resistance. Wastewater-based epidemiology is a useful tool for evaluating public health, via the monitoring of chemical and biological markers in wastewater influent, such as antibiotics. Sixteen antimicrobials and their metabolites were studied: sulfonamides, trimethoprim, metronidazole, quinolones, nitrofurantoin, cyclines, and antiretrovirals. Correction factors (CFs) for human drug excretion, for various drug forms, were determined via a systematic literature review of pharmacokinetic research. Analyte stability was examined over a 24 h study. The estimation of community-wide drug intake was evaluated using the corresponding catchment prescription data. Overall, antimicrobials excreted in an unchanged form were often observed to over-estimate daily intake. This could be attributed to biotransformation, e.g., via glucuronide cleavage, or direct disposal of unused drugs. Acetyl-sulfonamides, trimethoprim, hydroxy-metronidazole, clarithromycin, ciprofloxacin, ofloxacin, tetracycline, and oxytetracycline generally performed well in the estimation of drug intake, relative to prescription records. The low prevalence of quinolone and trimethoprim metabolites, and the low stability of nitrofurantoin, limited the ability to evaluate these metabolites and their respective CFs.
Topics: Anti-Bacterial Agents; Anti-Infective Agents; Humans; Metronidazole; Nitrofurantoin; Quinolones; Sulfonamides; Trimethoprim; Wastewater-Based Epidemiological Monitoring; Water Pollutants, Chemical
PubMed: 35594673
DOI: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2022.129001 -
BMJ Open Respiratory Research Aug 2023Current evidence on the effectiveness of SARS-CoV-2 prophylaxis is inconclusive. We aimed to systematically evaluate published studies on repurposed drugs for the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
Current evidence on the effectiveness of SARS-CoV-2 prophylaxis is inconclusive. We aimed to systematically evaluate published studies on repurposed drugs for the prevention of laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and/or COVID-19 among healthy adults.
DESIGN
Systematic review.
ELIGIBILITY
Quantitative experimental and observational intervention studies that evaluated the effectiveness of repurposed drugs for the primary prevention of SARS-CoV-2 infection and/or COVID-19 disease.
DATA SOURCE
PubMed and Embase (1 January 2020-28 September 2022).
RISK OF BIAS
Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 and Risk of Bias in Non-Randomised Studies of Interventions tools were applied to assess the quality of studies.
DATA ANALYSIS
Meta-analyses for each eligible drug were performed if ≥2 similar study designs were available.
RESULTS
In all, 65 (25 trials, 40 observational) and 29 publications were eligible for review and meta-analyses, respectively. Most studies pertained to hydroxychloroquine (32), ACE inhibitor (ACEi) or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) (11), statin (8), and ivermectin (8). In trials, hydroxychloroquine prophylaxis reduced laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection (risk ratio: 0.82 (95% CI 0.74 to 0.90), I=48%), a result largely driven by one clinical trial (weight: 60.5%). Such beneficial effects were not observed in observational studies, nor for prognostic clinical outcomes. Ivermectin did not significantly reduce the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection (RR: 0.35 (95% CI 0.10 to 1.26), I=96%) and findings for clinical outcomes were inconsistent. Neither ACEi or ARB were beneficial in reducing SARS-CoV-2 infection. Most of the evidence from clinical trials was of moderate quality and of lower quality in observational studies.
CONCLUSIONS
Results from our analysis are insufficient to support an evidence-based repurposed drug policy for SARS-CoV-2 prophylaxis because of inconsistency. In the view of scarce supportive evidence on repurposing drugs for COVID-19, alternative strategies such as immunisation of vulnerable people are warranted to prevent the future waves of infection.
PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER
CRD42021292797.
Topics: Adult; Humans; COVID-19; Pandemics; SARS-CoV-2; Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists; Hydroxychloroquine; Ivermectin; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Primary Prevention
PubMed: 37640510
DOI: 10.1136/bmjresp-2023-001674 -
Travel Medicine and Infectious Disease 2021In 2018, tafenoquine was approved for malaria chemoprophylaxis. We evaluated all available data on the safety and efficacy of tafenoquine chemoprophylaxis. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
In 2018, tafenoquine was approved for malaria chemoprophylaxis. We evaluated all available data on the safety and efficacy of tafenoquine chemoprophylaxis.
METHODS
This systematic review followed the PRISMA guidelines and was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42019123839). We searched PubMed, Embase, Scopus, CINAHL and Cochrane databases. Two authors (JDM, PS) screened all papers.
RESULTS
We included 44 papers in the qualitative and 9 in the quantitative analyses. These 9 randomized, controlled trials included 2495 participants, aged 12-60 years with 27.3% women. Six studies were conducted in Plasmodium spp.-endemic regions; two were human infection studies. 200 mg weekly tafenoquine and higher dosages lead to a significant reduction of Plasmodium spp. infection compared to placebo and were comparable to 250 mg mefloquine weekly with a protective efficacy between 77.9 and 100% or a total risk ratio of 0.22 (95%-CI: 0.07-0.73; p = 0.013) in favour of tafenoquine. Adverse events (AE) were comparable in frequency and severity between tafenoquine and comparator arms. One study reported significantly more gastrointestinal events in tafenoquine users (p ≤ 0.001). Evidence of increased, reversible, asymptomatic vortex keratopathy in subjects with prolonged tafenoquine exposures was found. A single, serious event of decreased macular sensitivity occurred.
CONCLUSION
This systematic review and meta-analysis of trials of G6PD-normal adults show that weekly tafenoquine 200 mg is well tolerated and effective as malaria chemoprophylaxis focusing primarily on Plasmodium falciparum but also on Plasmodium vivax. Our safety analysis is limited by heterogenous methods of adverse events reporting. Further research is indicated on the use of tafenoquine in diverse traveller populations.
Topics: Adult; Aminoquinolines; Antimalarials; Chemoprevention; Female; Humans; Malaria; Male
PubMed: 33227500
DOI: 10.1016/j.tmaid.2020.101908 -
Malaria Journal Mar 2017Despite increased efforts to control and ultimately eradicate human malaria, Plasmodium ovale malaria is for the most part outside the focus of research or public health... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Despite increased efforts to control and ultimately eradicate human malaria, Plasmodium ovale malaria is for the most part outside the focus of research or public health programmes. Importantly, the understanding of P. ovale-nowadays regarded as the two distinct species P. ovale wallikeri and P. ovale curtisi-largely stems from case reports and case series lacking study designs providing high quality evidence. Consecutively, there is a lack of systematic evaluation of the clinical presentation, appropriate treatment and relapse characteristics of P. ovale malaria. The aim of this systematic review is to provide a systematic appraisal of the current evidence for severe manifestations, relapse characteristics and treatment options for human P. ovale malaria.
METHODS AND RESULTS
This systematic review was performed according to the PRISMA guidelines and registered in the international prospective register for systematic reviews (PROSPERO 2016:CRD42016039214). P. ovale mono-infection was a strict inclusion criterion. Of 3454 articles identified by the literature search, 33 articles published between 1922 and 2015 met the inclusion criteria. These articles did not include randomized controlled trials. Five prospective uncontrolled clinical trials were performed on a total of 58 participants. P. ovale was sensitive to all tested drugs within the follow-up periods and on interpretable in vitro assays. Since its first description in 1922, only 18 relapsing cases of P. ovale with a total of 28 relapse events were identified in the scientific literature. There was however no molecular evidence for a causal relationship between dormant liver stages and subsequent relapses. A total of 22 severe cases of P. ovale malaria were published out of which five were fatal. Additionally, two cases of congenital P. ovale malaria were reported.
CONCLUSIONS
Current knowledge of P. ovale malaria is based on small trials with minor impact, case reports and clinical observations. This systematic review highlights that P. ovale is capable of causing severe disease, severe congenital malaria and may even lead to death. Evidence for relapses in patients with P. ovale malaria adds up to only a handful of cases. Nearly 100 years after P. ovale's first description by Stephens the evidence for the clinical characteristics, relapse potential and optimal treatments for P. ovale malaria is still scarce.
Topics: Antimalarials; Humans; Malaria; Plasmodium ovale; Recurrence
PubMed: 28284211
DOI: 10.1186/s12936-017-1759-2 -
Malaria Journal Apr 2015The hyper-reactive malarial splenomegaly syndrome (HMS) is a leading cause of massive splenomegaly in malaria-endemic countries. HMS is caused by a chronic antigenic... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
The hyper-reactive malarial splenomegaly syndrome (HMS) is a leading cause of massive splenomegaly in malaria-endemic countries. HMS is caused by a chronic antigenic stimulation derived from the malaria parasite. Classic Fakunle's major criteria for case definition are: persistent gross splenomegaly, elevated anti-malarial antibodies, IgM titre >2 SD above the local mean value and favourable response to long-term malaria prophylaxis. The syndrome is fatal if left untreated. The aim of this study is to systematically review the literature about HMS, particularly focussing on case definition, epidemiology and management.
METHODS
The search strategy was based on the following database sources: Pubmed, EmBase, Scopus. Search was done in March, 2014 and limited to English, Spanish, Italian, French, and Portuguese.
RESULTS
Papers detected were 149, of which 89 were included. Splenomegaly was variably defined and the criterion of increased IgM was not always respected. The highest prevalence was reported in Papua New Guinea (up to 80%). In different African countries, 31 to 76% of all splenomegalies were caused by HMS. Fatality rate reached 36% in three years. The most frequent anti-malarial treatments administered were weekly chloroquine or daily proguanil from a minimum of one month to lifelong. In non-endemic countries, a few authors opted for a single, short anti-malarial treatment. All treated patients with no further exposure improved. Cases not completely fulfilling Fakunle's criteria and therefore untreated, subsequently evolved into HMS. It seems thus appropriate to treat incomplete or 'early' HMS, too.
CONCLUSIONS
For patients not re-exposed to endemic areas, a short course of treatment is sufficient, showing that eradicating the infection is sufficient to cure HMS. Longer (probably lifelong) courses, or intermittent treatments, are required for those who remain exposed. Splenectomy, associated with high mortality, should be strictly limited to cases not responding to medical treatment.
Topics: Antibodies, Protozoan; Antimalarials; Humans; Immunoglobulin M; Malaria; Prevalence; Splenomegaly
PubMed: 25925423
DOI: 10.1186/s12936-015-0694-3 -
Clinical Microbiology and Infection :... Jul 2024Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia (PCP) is a common opportunistic infection among people living with HIV (PWH), particularly among new and untreated cases. Several... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Comparative Study Review
Comparative efficacy and safety of Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia prophylaxis regimens for people living with HIV: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
BACKGROUND
Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia (PCP) is a common opportunistic infection among people living with HIV (PWH), particularly among new and untreated cases. Several regimens are available for the prophylaxis of PCP, including trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (TMP-SMX), dapsone-based regimens (DBRs), aerosolized pentamidine (AP), and atovaquone.
OBJECTIVES
To compare the efficacy and safety of PCP prophylaxis regimens in PWH by network meta-analysis.
METHODS
DATA SOURCES: Embase, MEDLINE, and CENTRAL from inception to June 21, 2023.
STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA
Comparative randomized controlled trials (RCTs).
PARTICIPANTS
PWH.
INTERVENTIONS
Regimens for PCP prophylaxis either compared head-to-head or versus no treatment/placebo.
ASSESSMENT OF RISK OF BIAS
Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for RCTs 2.
METHODS OF DATA SYNTHESIS
Title or abstract and full-text screening and data extraction were performed in duplicate by two independent reviewers. Data on PCP incidence, all-cause mortality, and discontinuation due to toxicity were pooled and ranked by network meta-analysis. Subgroup analyses of primary versus secondary prophylaxis, by year, and by dosage were performed.
RESULTS
A total of 26 RCTs, comprising 55 treatment arms involving 7516 PWH were included. For the prevention of PCP, TMP-SMX was ranked the most favourable agent and was superior to DBRs (risk ratio [RR] = 0.54; 95% CI, 0.36-0.83) and AP (RR = 0.53; 95% CI, 0.36-0.77). TMP-SMX was also the only agent with a mortality benefit compared with no treatment/placebo (RR = 0.79; 95% CI, 0.64-0.98). However, TMP-SMX was also ranked as the most toxic agent with a greater risk of discontinuation than DBRs (RR = 1.25; 95% CI, 1.01-1.54) and AP (7.20; 95% CI, 5.37-9.66). No significant differences in PCP prevention or mortality were detected among the other regimens. The findings remained consistent within subgroups.
CONCLUSIONS
TMP-SMX is the most effective agent for PCP prophylaxis in PWH and the only agent to confer a mortality benefit; consequently, it should continue to be recommended as the first-line agent. Further studies are necessary to determine the optimal dosing of TMP-SMX to maximize efficacy and minimize toxicity.
Topics: Humans; Pneumonia, Pneumocystis; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Network Meta-Analysis; Trimethoprim, Sulfamethoxazole Drug Combination; Pneumocystis carinii; HIV Infections; AIDS-Related Opportunistic Infections; Dapsone; Pentamidine; Atovaquone; Antifungal Agents; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 38583518
DOI: 10.1016/j.cmi.2024.03.037 -
Malaria Journal Dec 2017There is no agreed standard method to assess the efficacy of anti-malarials for uncomplicated falciparum in pregnancy despite an increased risk of adverse outcomes for... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Systematic literature review and meta-analysis of the efficacy of artemisinin-based and quinine-based treatments for uncomplicated falciparum malaria in pregnancy: methodological challenges.
BACKGROUND
There is no agreed standard method to assess the efficacy of anti-malarials for uncomplicated falciparum in pregnancy despite an increased risk of adverse outcomes for the mother and the fetus. The aim of this review is to present the currently available evidence from both observational and interventional cohort studies on anti-malarial efficacy in pregnancy and summarize the variability of assessment and reporting found in the review process.
METHODS
Efficacy methodology and assessment of artemisinin-based treatments (ABT) and quinine-based treatments (QBT) were reviewed systematically using seven databases and two clinical trial registries (protocol registration-PROSPERO: CRD42017054808). Pregnant women in all trimesters with parasitologically confirmed uncomplicated falciparum malaria were included irrespective of symptoms. This review attempted to re-calculate proportions of treatment success applying the same definition as the standard WHO methodology for non-pregnant populations. Aggregated data meta-analyses using data from randomized control trials (RCTs) comparing different treatments were performed by random effects model.
RESULTS
A total of 48 eligible efficacy studies were identified including 7279 treated Plasmodium falciparum episodes. While polymerase chain reaction (PCR) was used in 24 studies for differentiating recurrence, the assessment and reporting of treatment efficacy was heterogeneous. When the same definition could be applied, PCR-corrected treatment failure of ≥ 10% at any time points was observed in 3/30 ABT and 3/7 QBT arms. Ten RCTs compared different combinations of ABT but there was a maximum of two published RCTs with PCR-corrected outcomes for each comparison. Five RCTs compared ABT and QBT. Overall, the risk of treatment failure was significantly lower in ABT than in QBT (risk ratio 0.22, 95% confidence interval 0.07-0.63), although the actual drug combinations and outcome endpoints were different. First trimester women were included in 12 studies none of which were RCTs of ABT.
CONCLUSIONS
Efficacy studies in pregnancy are not only limited in number but use varied methodological assessments. In five RCTs with comparable methodology, ABT resulted in higher efficacy than QBT in the second and third trimester of pregnancy. Individual patient data meta-analysis can include data from observational cohort studies and could overcome some of the limitations of the current assessment given the paucity of data in this vulnerable group.
Topics: Antimalarials; Artemisinins; Drug Therapy, Combination; Female; Humans; Malaria, Falciparum; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Complications, Parasitic; Quinine
PubMed: 29237461
DOI: 10.1186/s12936-017-2135-y -
The Lancet. Infectious Diseases Feb 2024Primaquine radical cure is used to treat dormant liver-stage parasites and prevent relapsing Plasmodium vivax malaria but is limited by concerns of haemolysis. We... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Primaquine radical cure is used to treat dormant liver-stage parasites and prevent relapsing Plasmodium vivax malaria but is limited by concerns of haemolysis. We undertook a systematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis to investigate the haematological safety of different primaquine regimens for P vivax radical cure.
METHODS
For this systematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis, we searched MEDLINE, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane Central for prospective clinical studies of uncomplicated P vivax from endemic countries published between Jan 1, 2000, and June 8, 2023. We included studies if they had active follow-up of at least 28 days, if they included a treatment group with daily primaquine given over multiple days where primaquine was commenced within 3 days of schizontocidal treatment and was given alone or coadministered with chloroquine or one of four artemisinin-based combination therapies (ie, artemether-lumefantrine, artesunate-mefloquine, artesunate-amodiaquine, or dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine), and if they recorded haemoglobin or haematocrit concentrations on day 0. We excluded studies if they were on prevention, prophylaxis, or patients with severe malaria, or if data were extracted retrospectively from medical records outside of a planned trial. For the meta-analysis, we contacted the investigators of eligible trials to request individual patient data and we then pooled data that were made available by Aug 23, 2021. The main outcome was haemoglobin reduction of more than 25% to a concentration of less than 7 g/dL by day 14. Haemoglobin concentration changes between day 0 and days 2-3 and between day 0 and days 5-7 were assessed by mixed-effects linear regression for patients with glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase (G6PD) activity of (1) 30% or higher and (2) between 30% and less than 70%. The study was registered with PROSPERO, CRD42019154470 and CRD42022303680.
FINDINGS
Of 226 identified studies, 18 studies with patient-level data from 5462 patients from 15 countries were included in the analysis. A haemoglobin reduction of more than 25% to a concentration of less than 7 g/dL occurred in one (0·1%) of 1208 patients treated without primaquine, none of 893 patients treated with a low daily dose of primaquine (<0·375 mg/kg per day), five (0·3%) of 1464 patients treated with an intermediate daily dose (0·375 mg/kg per day to <0·75 mg/kg per day), and six (0·5%) of 1269 patients treated with a high daily dose (≥0·75 mg/kg per day). The covariate-adjusted mean estimated haemoglobin changes at days 2-3 were -0·6 g/dL (95% CI -0·7 to -0·5), -0·7 g/dL (-0·8 to -0·5), -0·6 g/dL (-0·7 to -0·4), and -0·5 g/dL (-0·7 to -0·4), respectively. In 51 patients with G6PD activity between 30% and less than 70%, the adjusted mean haemoglobin concentration on days 2-3 decreased as G6PD activity decreased; two patients in this group who were treated with a high daily dose of primaquine had a reduction of more than 25% to a concentration of less than 7 g/dL. 17 of 18 included studies had a low or unclear risk of bias.
INTERPRETATION
Treatment of patients with G6PD activity of 30% or higher with 0·25-0·5 mg/kg per day primaquine regimens and patients with G6PD activity of 70% or higher with 0·25-1 mg/kg per day regimens were associated with similar risks of haemolysis to those in patients treated without primaquine, supporting the safe use of primaquine radical cure at these doses.
FUNDING
Australian National Health and Medical Research Council, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, and Medicines for Malaria Venture.
Topics: Humans; Antimalarials; Artemether, Lumefantrine Drug Combination; Artesunate; Australia; Hemoglobins; Hemolysis; Malaria, Vivax; Plasmodium vivax; Primaquine; Prospective Studies; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 37748497
DOI: 10.1016/S1473-3099(23)00431-0 -
Arquivos Brasileiros de Cardiologia 2023Previous systematic reviews have identified no benefit of hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine in non-hospitalized COVID-19 patients. After publication of these reviews,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Previous systematic reviews have identified no benefit of hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine in non-hospitalized COVID-19 patients. After publication of these reviews, the results of COPE, the largest randomized trial conducted to date, became available.
OBJECTIVES
To conduct a systematic review and meta-analyses of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) to synthesize the evidence on the efficacy and safety of hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine for non-hospitalized COVID-19 patients compared to placebo or standard of care.
METHODS
Searches were conducted in PubMed, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov complemented by manual search. Pairwise meta-analyses, risk of bias, and evidence certainty assessments were conducted, including optimal information size analysis (OIS). A level of significance of 0.05 was adopted in the meta-analysis. PROSPERO: CRD42021265427.
RESULTS
Eight RCTs with 3,219 participants were included. COVID-19 hospitalization and any adverse events rates were not significantly different between hydroxychloroquine (5.6% and 35.1%) and control (7.4% and 20.4%) (risk ratio, RR, 0.77, 95% confidence interval, CI, 0.57-1.04, I2: 0%; RR 1.78, 95%-CI 0.90; 3.52, I2: 93%, respectively). The OIS (7,880) was not reached for COVID-19 hospitalization, independently of the simulation for anticipated event rate and RR reduction estimate.
CONCLUSION
Evidence of very low certainty showed lack of benefit with hydroxychloroquine in preventing COVID-19 hospitalizations. Despite being the systematic review with the largest number of participants included, the OIS, considering pre-vaccination response to infection, has not yet been reached.
Topics: Humans; COVID-19; Hydroxychloroquine; COVID-19 Drug Treatment; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Chloroquine
PubMed: 37042856
DOI: 10.36660/abc.20220380 -
European Journal of Epidemiology Aug 2022Recruitment into randomized trials of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) for prevention of COVID-19 has been adversely affected by a widespread conviction that HCQ is not... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Recruitment into randomized trials of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) for prevention of COVID-19 has been adversely affected by a widespread conviction that HCQ is not effective for prevention. In the absence of an updated systematic review, we conducted a meta-analysis of randomized trials that study the effectiveness of HCQ to prevent COVID-19.
METHODS
A search of PubMed, medRxiv, and clinicaltrials.gov combined with expert consultation found 11 completed randomized trials: 7 pre-exposure prophylaxis trials and 4 post-exposure prophylaxis trials. We obtained or calculated the risk ratio of COVID-19 diagnosis for assignment to HCQ versus no HCQ (either placebo or usual care) for each trial, and then pooled the risk ratio estimates.
RESULTS
The pooled risk ratio estimate of the pre-exposure prophylaxis trials was 0.72 (95% CI: 0.58-0.90) when using either a fixed effect or a standard random effects approach, and 0.72 (95% CI: 0.55-0.95) when using a conservative modification of the Hartung-Knapp random effects approach. The corresponding estimates for the post-exposure prophylaxis trials were 0.91 (95% CI: 0.72-1.16) and 0.91 (95% CI: 0.62-1.35). All trials found a similar rate of serious adverse effects in the HCQ and no HCQ groups.
DISCUSSION
A benefit of HCQ as prophylaxis for COVID-19 cannot be ruled out based on the available evidence from randomized trials. However, the "not statistically significant" findings from early prophylaxis trials were widely interpreted as definite evidence of lack of effectiveness of HCQ. This interpretation disrupted the timely completion of the remaining trials and thus the generation of precise estimates for pandemic management before the development of vaccines.
Topics: COVID-19; COVID-19 Testing; Humans; Hydroxychloroquine; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; SARS-CoV-2; COVID-19 Drug Treatment
PubMed: 35943669
DOI: 10.1007/s10654-022-00891-4