-
International Journal of Molecular... Jan 2020Alzheimer's disease (AD) is the leading cause of dementia worldwide. It involves progressive impairment of cognitive function. A growing number of neuroprotective...
Alzheimer's disease (AD) is the leading cause of dementia worldwide. It involves progressive impairment of cognitive function. A growing number of neuroprotective compounds have been identified with potential anti-AD properties through in vitro and in vivo models of AD. Quercetin, a natural flavonoid contained in a wide range of plant species, is repeatedly reported to exert neuroprotective effects in experimental animal AD models. However, a systematic analysis of methodological rigor and the comparison between different studies is still lacking. A systematic review uses a methodical approach to minimize the bias in each independent study, providing a less biased, comprehensive understanding of research findings and an objective judgement of the strength of evidence and the reliability of conclusions. In this review, we identified 14 studies describing the therapeutic efficacy of quercetin on animal AD models by electronic and manual retrieval. Some of the results of the studies included were meta-analyzed by forest plot, and the methodological quality of each preclinical trial was assessed with SYRCLE's risk of bias tool. Our results demonstrated the consistent neuroprotective effects of quercetin on different AD models, and the pharmacological mechanisms of quercetin on AD models are summarized. This information eliminated the bias of each individual study, providing guidance for future tests and supporting evidence for further implementation of quercetin into clinical trials. However, the limitations of some studies, such as the absence of sample size calculations and low method quality, should also be noted.
Topics: Alzheimer Disease; Animals; Disease Models, Animal; Humans; Neuroprotective Agents; Quercetin
PubMed: 31941000
DOI: 10.3390/ijms21020493 -
Journal of the International... Feb 2020Dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB) and Parkinson's disease dementia (PDD) have substantial clinical and biological overlap, with cognitive deficits typically observed in...
OBJECTIVES
Dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB) and Parkinson's disease dementia (PDD) have substantial clinical and biological overlap, with cognitive deficits typically observed in the executive and visuospatial domains. However, the neuropsychological profiles of mild cognitive impairment (MCI) associated with these disorders are not well understood.
METHODS
This systematic review examined existing literature on cognition in MCI due to LB disease (MCI-LB) and PD (PD-MCI) using an electronic search of seven databases (Medline, Embase, Psychinfo, PubMed, ProQuest, Scopus, and ScienceDirect). MCI-LB results were reviewed narratively given the small number of resulting papers (n = 7). Outcome variables from PD-MCI studies (n = 13) were extracted for meta-analysis of standardised mean differences (SMD).
RESULTS
In MCI-LB, executive dysfunction and slowed processing speed were the most prominent impairments, while visuospatial and working memory (WM) functions were also poor. MCI-LB scored significantly lower on verbal memory tests relative to controls, but significantly higher than patients with MCI due to Alzheimer's disease. Quantitative analysis of studies in PD-MCI showed a similar profile of impairment, with the largest deficits in visuospatial function (Benton Judgement of Line Orientation, SMD g = -2.09), executive function (Trail Making Test B, SMD g = -1.65), verbal ability (Naming Tests, SMD g = -0.140), and WM (Trail Making Test A, SMD g = -1.20). In both MCI-LB and PD-MCI, verbal and visuospatial memory retrieval was impaired, while encoding and storage appeared relatively intact.
CONCLUSIONS
The findings of this systematic review indicate similar neuropsychological profiles in the MCI stages of DLB and PDD. Executive impairment may at least partially explain poor performance in other domains.
Topics: Cognitive Dysfunction; Executive Function; Humans; Lewy Body Disease; Parkinson Disease
PubMed: 31826772
DOI: 10.1017/S1355617719001103 -
Studies in Health Technology and... Aug 2019Diabetic Retinopathy (DR) is one of the most common microvascular complications presenting by patients diagnosticated with diabetic diseases. Uncontrolled hyperglycemia... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Diabetic Retinopathy (DR) is one of the most common microvascular complications presenting by patients diagnosticated with diabetic diseases. Uncontrolled hyperglycemia may manifest as visual impairment and blindness. The early detection of DR is essential to minimize the risk and consequence of visual diminishing. The standard gold diagnoses tool relies on different imaging modalities and requires a judgment of expert photographers, which are not available in most of the primary care centers or remote location. In that scenario, an automate or semiautomated DR screening systems can contribute to improving the accuracy of the diagnostic. Thus, we performed a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis to evaluate the Decision Support Systems (DSS) in diagnosing DR. The overall Diagnostic Odds Ratio was 73.15 (95%CI: 37.54-142.50), sensitivity was 97.70 (95%CI: 97.50-97.90) and specificity was 90.30 (95%CI: 90.00-90.60). Our results corroborate with the concept of usefulness of DSSs in early diagnosis, screening and preliminary evaluation of suspicious images of DR.
Topics: Decision Making; Diabetic Retinopathy; Expert Systems; Humans; Mass Screening; Software
PubMed: 31438050
DOI: 10.3233/SHTI190349 -
Autism Research : Official Journal of... Oct 2019Problems with timing and time perception have been suggested as key characteristics of autism spectrum condition (ASC). Studies and personal accounts from clinicians,...
Problems with timing and time perception have been suggested as key characteristics of autism spectrum condition (ASC). Studies and personal accounts from clinicians, parents, caregivers, and self-reports from autistic people themselves often refer to problems with time. Although a number of empirical studies have examined aspects relating to time in autistic individuals, there remains no clear consensus on whether or how timing mechanisms may be affected in autism. A key reason for this lack of clarity is the wide range of timing processes that exist and subsequently the wide range of methodologies, research paradigms, and samples that time-based studies have used with autism populations. In order to summarize and organize the available literature on this issue, a systematic review was conducted. Five electronic databases were consulted. From an initial 597 records (after duplicates were removed), 45 papers were selected and reviewed. The studies are reviewed within different sections based on the different types of timing ability that have been explored in the neurotypical (NT) population: time sensitivity, interval timing, and higher-order time perception. Within each section cognitive models, methodologies, possible clinical implications, and research results are discussed. The results show different consistency across studies between the three types of timing ability. The highest consistency of results showing atypical time perception abilities is found in high-level time perception studies. It remains unclear if autism is characterized by a fundamental time perception impairment. Suggestions for future research are discussed. Autism Res 2019, 12: 1440-1462. © 2019 International Society for Autism Research, Wiley Periodicals, Inc. LAY SUMMARY: This systematic review examines the different types of timing and time perception behavior that have been investigated in autism. Overall, there are a number of studies that show differences between autistic and non-autistic individuals, but some studies do not find such differences. Group differences are more consistent across studies using complex tasks rather than simpler more fundamental timing tasks. We suggest that experiments across a range of timing tasks would be fruitful to address gaps in our knowledge.
Topics: Adolescent; Autism Spectrum Disorder; Female; Humans; Male; Time Perception
PubMed: 31336032
DOI: 10.1002/aur.2170 -
Physiotherapy Theory and Practice Dec 2020Treatment of chronic pain is challenging and there is often failure of recovery, with the need to look at different approaches in its management. Central mechanisms may... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis
Treatment of chronic pain is challenging and there is often failure of recovery, with the need to look at different approaches in its management. Central mechanisms may contribute to chronicity (i.e. disturbance in body schema). Laterality judgment is dependent on body schema and can determine affected central mechanisms. This review aimed to determine whether there are laterality judgment differences between chronic pain and pain-free individuals. Methods: A search was done of various databases, using combinations of keywords, and reference lists of full-text articles. Articles were considered from inception until February 2018. Eighteen studies were included. Methodological quality was assessed by two reviewers using the JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist. Studies were analyzed broadly then divided into subgroups. A meta-analysis or narrative review was done. There was high heterogeneity for broad outcome measures, complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS1), and upper limb pain. Analysis for accuracy in lower limb conditions showed a medium significant effect size (0.59) and significant 95%CI (0.11-1.07). Low back and cervical pain results could not be pooled into meta-analysis (due to different methods of reporting). Laterality judgment impairment was shown in CPRS1, upper limb pain, hand and wrist pain, carpal-tunnel syndrome, facial pain, knee osteoarthritis, and leg pain. No conclusions could be drawn in low back pain, due to the low-quality evidence and differing results. There was no impairment in whiplash-associated disorders and nonspecific cervical pain showed conflicting evidence.
Topics: Body Image; Chronic Pain; Functional Laterality; Humans; Judgment
PubMed: 30686110
DOI: 10.1080/09593985.2019.1570575