-
Public Health Reviews 2021To identify the prevalence and factors associated with common mental disorders in adult women. Searches were carried out in the PubMed, Web of Science, Science Direct,...
To identify the prevalence and factors associated with common mental disorders in adult women. Searches were carried out in the PubMed, Web of Science, Science Direct, Scopus, Cinahl, Google Scholar and Open Gray databases. The study protocol was registered with PROSPERO under number CRD42020168231. Cross-sectional studies showing the prevalence of common mental disorders in women over 18 years were included. Studies with men, children and pregnant women of another age group and with other mental disorders and other types of studies were excluded. The Joanna Briggs Institute checklist was used to assess the risk of bias. Nineteen studies were included in this review. The prevalence of CMD ranged from 9.6% to 69.3%. The main associated factors were unemployment, indebtedness, low income, being a housewife, smoking, low education, poor self-rated health, being single, divorced or widowed. The risk of bias in the studies was classified as low and moderate. This review revealed a variable prevalence rate of CMD in adult women. Public policies are needed to create strategies to prevent the mental illness of these women.
PubMed: 34692182
DOI: 10.3389/phrs.2021.1604234 -
PloS One 2020To investigate that whether an association between marital status and the female breast cancer risk exists. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
To investigate that whether an association between marital status and the female breast cancer risk exists.
METHODS
The MEDLINE, EMBASE and PsycINFO databases were searched from their inception to July 2019. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to rate the methodological quality of included studies. Study data were pooled using random-effects meta-analyses to compare the breast cancer risk between unmarried, widowed, divorced or lifelong single women and married women. This study is registered with PROSPERO (number CRD42018112368).
RESULTS
Forty-nine publications were included in the meta-analysis. Compared with married women, unmarried and lifelong single women had an elevated risk of breast cancer, and the pooled ORs of case-control studies were 1.20 (95% CI: 1.07 to 1.35) and 1.24 (95% CI: 1.05 to 1.45), respectively. In the subgroup analyses under these two comparisons, hospital-based estimates and multivariate-adjusted estimates demonstrated a strong association, while population-based estimates and age-adjusted estimates produced nonsignificant results. The pooled OR of cohort studies examining the effect of being a lifelong single woman was 1.10 (95% CI: 1.04 to 1.16). Heterogeneity was moderate to substantial across case-control studies (I2: 46% to 82%), which may be partially explained by differences in geographic regions, publication years and control types. Possible publication bias was indicated by the funnel plot and Egger's test (P = 0.03).
CONCLUSIONS
Marital status may correlate with the risk of developing female breast cancer. However, suboptimal selection of controls, insufficient exploration of confounding effects, inadequate ascertainment of marital status, and possible publication bias may have limited the quality of the available evidence. Overall, conclusions that marital status is an independent risk factor for breast cancer could not be drawn, and further prospective rigorous cohort studies are warranted.
Topics: Age Factors; Breast Neoplasms; Female; Humans; Marital Status; Observational Studies as Topic; Risk Factors
PubMed: 32134997
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0229899 -
Conflict and Health 2017The combination of global demographic changes and a growing number of humanitarian crises in middle-income countries that have a higher life expectancy has led to an...
BACKGROUND
The combination of global demographic changes and a growing number of humanitarian crises in middle-income countries that have a higher life expectancy has led to an increase in the number of older populations affected by humanitarian crises. The aim of this review was to systematically examine evidence on the health needs of older populations in humanitarian crises, including both armed conflicts and natural disasters, in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs).
METHODS
A systematic review methodology was used. The search strategy used terms related to older populations and humanitarian crises in LMICs. Five bibliographic databases were used, along with relevant grey literature sources. Descriptive analysis was used, and a quality assessment conducted using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and CASP instruments.
RESULTS
A total of 36 studies were eligible for review. The majority of the studies were cross-sectional, three were cohort studies, and four used qualitative methodologies. The main health outcomes were mental health, physical health, functioning, and nutrition. Vulnerability factors included older age, female gender, being widowed, increased exposure to traumatic events, prior mental health problems, low income and education, and rural residency. Ten studies addressed the responsiveness of health systems and access to such services. The quality of the included studies was generally low.
CONCLUSIONS
There is an urgent need to strengthen the evidence base on the health needs of older populations in humanitarian crises.
PubMed: 29238401
DOI: 10.1186/s13031-017-0133-x -
Value in Health Regional Issues Jan 2024Social preference values of health states are a fundamental input for the preparation of studies in health economics. Several countries have undertaken studies to obtain...
OBJECTIVES
Social preference values of health states are a fundamental input for the preparation of studies in health economics. Several countries have undertaken studies to obtain these values. Our objective was to conduct a structured and systematic literature review of articles that calculates this set of representative values at the national level in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs).
METHODS
In this systematic review, we searched the Embase, MEDLINE, Ovid, SciELO, and LILACS databases, among others, for studies published up to June 2022 that estimated nationally representative health states preferences values for LMICs. We summarized the information qualitatively and assessed the risk of bias in each article using the consensus-based standards for selecting health measurement instruments checklist tool.
RESULTS
Of the 23 663 articles identified, 35 studies were eligible for inclusion. The studies were from 19 countries in Latin-American, Europe, Africa, and Asia. No studies were found for low-income countries. The most commonly applied generic instrument for measuring health-related quality of life was the 5-level version of EQ-5D and 3-level version of EQ-5D. Preference was given to face-to-face administration of these instruments. The sociodemographic variables with the most significant negative correlation versus utility were older adults, marital status (widowed or divorced), and low educational level and income.
CONCLUSIONS
Worldwide, there have been few studies that have estimated, in a nationally representative manner, the social values of health states preferences in LMICs. We consider the local estimate of this set of societal values relevant for any society to improve decision making in allocating resources in health budgets.
Topics: Humans; Aged; Quality of Life; Developing Countries; Income; Europe; Africa
PubMed: 37976776
DOI: 10.1016/j.vhri.2023.07.004