4.6 Article

Meta-analytic evaluation of the association between head injury and risk of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis

期刊

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY
卷 32, 期 10, 页码 867-879

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10654-017-0327-y

关键词

Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis; Motor neuron disease; Head trauma; Reverse causation

资金

  1. European Commission

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Head injury is considered as a potential risk factor for amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS). However, several recent studies have suggested that head injury is not a cause, but a consequence of latent ALS. We aimed to evaluate such a possibility of reverse causation with meta-analyses considering time lags between the incidence of head injuries and the occurrence of ALS. We searched Medline and Web of Science for case-control, cross-sectional, or cohort studies that quantitatively investigated the head-injury-related risk of ALS and were published until 1 December 2016. After selecting appropriate publications based on PRISMA statement, we performed random-effects meta-analyses to calculate odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Sixteen of 825 studies fulfilled the eligibility criteria. The association between head injuries and ALS was statistically significant when the meta-analysis included all the 16 studies (OR 1.45, 95% CI 1.21-1.74). However, in the meta-analyses considering the time lags between the experience of head injuries and diagnosis of ALS, the association was weaker (OR 1.21, 95% CI 1.01-1.46, time lag ae 1 year) or not significant (e.g. OR 1.16, 95% CI 0.84-1.59, time lag ae 3 years). Although it did not deny associations between head injuries and ALS, the current study suggests a possibility that such a head-injury-oriented risk of ALS has been somewhat overestimated. For more accurate evaluation, it would be necessary to conduct more epidemiological studies that consider the time lags between the occurrence of head injuries and the diagnosis of ALS.

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

4.6
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