| 1. |
- Bruck, Katharina, et al.
(författare)
-
Methodology used in studies reporting chronic kidney disease prevalence : a systematic literature review
- 2015
-
Ingår i: Nephrology, Dialysis and Transplantation. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 0931-0509 .- 1460-2385. ; 30:S4, s. 6-16
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background. Many publications report the prevalence of chronic kidney disease (CKD) in the general population. Comparisons across studies are hampered as CKD prevalence estimations are influenced by study population characteristics and laboratory methods. Methods. For this systematic review, two researchers independently searched PubMed, MEDLINE and EMBASE to identify all original research articles that were published between 1 January 2003 and 1 November 2014 reporting the prevalence of CKD in the European adult general population. Data on study methodology and reporting of CKD prevalence results were independently extracted by two researchers. Results. We identified 82 eligible publications and included 48 publications of individual studies for the data extraction. There was considerable variation in population sample selection. The majority of studies did not report the sampling frame used, and the response ranged from 10 to 87%. With regard to the assessment of kidney function, 67% used a Jaffe assay, whereas 13% used the enzymatic assay for creatinine determination. Isotope dilution mass spectrometry calibration was used in 29%. The CKD-EPI (52%) and MDRD (75%) equations were most often used to estimate glomerular filtration rate (GFR). CKD was defined as estimated GFR (eGFR) <60 mL/min/1.73 m(2) in 92% of studies. Urinary markers of CKD were assessed in 60% of the studies. CKD prevalence was reported by sex and age strata in 54 and 50% of the studies, respectively. In publications with a primary objective of reporting CKD prevalence, 39% reported a 95% confidence interval. Conclusions. The findings from this systematic review showed considerable variation in methods for sampling the general population and assessment of kidney function across studies reporting CKD prevalence. These results are utilized to provide recommendations to help optimize both the design and the reporting of future CKD prevalence studies, which will enhance comparability of study results.
|
|
| 2. |
- Carlsson, A. C., et al.
(författare)
-
Prediction of cardiovascular disease by abdominal obesity measures is dependent on body weight and sex - Results from two community based cohort studies
- 2014
-
Ingår i: NMCD. Nutrition Metabolism and Cardiovascular Diseases. - : Elsevier BV. - 0939-4753 .- 1590-3729. ; 24:8, s. 891-899
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Aim: To study waist-hip ratio (WHR), waist circumference (WC), sagittal abdominal diameter (SAD), and waist-hip-height ratio (WHHR) as predictors of CVD, in men and women stratified by BMI (cut-off >= 25). Methods and results: A cohort of n = 3741 (53% women) 60-year old individuals without CVD was followed for 11-years (375 CVD cases). To replicate the results, we also assessed another large independent cohort; The Malmo Diet and Cancer study - cardiovascular cohort (MDCC, (n = 5180, 60% women, 602 CVD cases during 16-years). After adjustment for established risk factors in normal-weight women, the hazard ratio (HR) per one standard deviation (SD) were; WHR; 1.91 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.35-2.70), WC; 1.81 (95% CI 1.02-3.20), SAD; 1.25 (95% CI 0.74-2.11), and WHHR; 1.97 (95% CI 1.40-2.78). In men the association with WHR, WHHR and WC were not significant, whereas SAD was the only measure that significantly predicted CVD in men (HR 1.19 (95% CI 1.04-1.35). After adjustments for established risk factors in overweight/obese women, none of the measures were significantly associated with CVD risk. In men, however, all measures were significant predictors; WHR; 1.24 (955 CI 1.04-1.47), WC 1.19 (95% CI 1.00-1.42), SAD 1.21 (95% CI 1.00-1.46), and WHHR; 1.23 (95% CI 1.05-1.44). Only the findings in men with BMI >= 25 were verified in MDCC. Conclusion: In normal weight individuals, WHHR and WHR were the best predictors in women, whereas SAD was the only independent predictor in men. Among overweight/obese individuals all measures failed to predict CVD in women, whereas WHHR was the strongest predictor after adjustments for CVD risk factors in men.
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
