4.5 Review

Systematic review and meta-analysis of the association between paediatric obesity and telomere length

期刊

ACTA PAEDIATRICA
卷 110, 期 10, 页码 2695-2703

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/apa.15971

关键词

children; meta-analysis; obesity; systematic review; telomere shortening

资金

  1. Sun Yat-sen University [51000-18841211]
  2. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities [2021qntd42]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study found a negative association between paediatric obesity and telomere length, with the negative trend being more significant in boys than girls. Weight control in children may have a beneficial effect on telomere length.
Aim This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess the association between paediatric obesity and telomere length. Methods We conducted a comprehensive literature search for original studies assessing the associations between obesity and telomere length in children. Fixed or random effects with inverse-variance meta-analysis were used to estimate the standardised mean difference (SMD) and its 95% confidence interval (95% CI) between overweight or obese and normal-weight children. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I-2 statistic, and meta-regression analyses were used to evaluate the potential source of heterogeneity. Subgroup analysis was further conducted by sex. Results A total of 11 studies were included. The meta-analysis showed that children who were overweight or obese had shorter telomere length than normal-weight children (SMD: -0.85; 95% CI: -1.42 to -0.28; p < 0.01). However, significant heterogeneity was present (I-2 = 97%; p < 0.01). Study design, methods used for measuring telomere length, tissue types, mean age, and percentage of boys were not the source of heterogeneity revealed by meta-regression analysis. The inverse trend was significant only in boys, but not in girls. Conclusion There was a negative association between paediatric obesity and telomere length. Weight control in children might have beneficial effect on telomere length.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据