4.5 Review

Prevention of Keshan Disease by Selenium Supplementation: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

期刊

BIOLOGICAL TRACE ELEMENT RESEARCH
卷 186, 期 1, 页码 98-105

出版社

SPRINGERNATURE
DOI: 10.1007/s12011-018-1302-5

关键词

Keshan disease; Selenium supplementation; Community trials; Etiology; Systematic review

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [81202154, 81372938, 81773368]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Systematic review (SR) of high-quality studies provides superior evidence, but an SR has not been conducted to evaluate the association between Keshan disease (KD) and selenium deficiency because SR was not available when KD was highly prevalent in the 1950s to 1970s. The objective of this study was to update our understanding of the etiology of KD and provide evidence for policies and strategies in KD surveillance, prevention, and control. We identified related studies by searching the CNKI, Wanfang, CQVIP, SinoMed, CMCI, PubMed, Embase, and EBSCO databases from January 1935 to April 2017. Community trials that met the inclusion criteria were included. Risk ratios (RR) with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI) were pooled to compare incidences between the two groups. A total of 17 articles (including 41 studies) were included. In total, the studies included 1,983,238 subjects, 683,075 of which were in experimental groups and 1,300,163 of which were in control groups. The protection rates were over 80% in 35 studies, and the overall effect (risk ratio) was 0.14 [95% CI (0.12, 0.16), P<0.05]. Potential publication bias was observed in the funnel plots, but the results of Egger's and Begg's tests showed that there was no evidence of publication bias. Giving selenium supplements to the residents of KD endemic areas significantly reduced the incidence of KD. Selenium deficiency is therefore a cause of KD by the criterion of causation in modern epidemiology. Selenium should be included in the KD surveillance program. The description of unknown cause in the definition of KD may be inappropriate.

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