Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
Mais filtros











Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Int J Epidemiol ; 53(1)2024 Feb 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38205821

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Life course epidemiology examines associations between repeated measures of risk and health outcomes across different phases of life. Empirical research, however, is often based on discrete-time models that assume that sporadic measurement occasions fully capture underlying long-term continuous processes of risk. METHODS: We propose (i) the functional relevant life course model (fRLM), which treats repeated, discrete measures of risk as unobserved continuous processes, and (ii) a testing procedure to assign probabilities that the data correspond to conceptual models of life course epidemiology (critical period, sensitive period and accumulation models). The performance of the fRLM is evaluated with simulations, and the approach is illustrated with empirical applications relating body mass index (BMI) to mRNA-seq signatures of chronic kidney disease, inflammation and breast cancer. RESULTS: Simulations reveal that fRLM identifies the correct life course model with three to five repeated assessments of risk and 400 subjects. The empirical examples reveal that chronic kidney disease reflects a critical period process and inflammation and breast cancer likely reflect sensitive period mechanisms. CONCLUSIONS: The proposed fRLM treats repeated measures of risk as continuous processes and, under realistic data scenarios, the method provides accurate probabilities that the data correspond to commonly studied models of life course epidemiology. fRLM is implemented with publicly-available software.


Assuntos
Neoplasias da Mama , Insuficiência Renal Crônica , Humanos , Feminino , Acontecimentos que Mudam a Vida , Teorema de Bayes , Inflamação , Insuficiência Renal Crônica/epidemiologia , Neoplasias da Mama/epidemiologia
2.
PLoS Med ; 19(5): e1003987, 2022 05.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35617363

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Debate about the level of asymptomatic Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection continues. The amount of evidence is increasing and study designs have changed over time. We updated a living systematic review to address 3 questions: (1) Among people who become infected with SARS-CoV-2, what proportion does not experience symptoms at all during their infection? (2) What is the infectiousness of asymptomatic and presymptomatic, compared with symptomatic, SARS-CoV-2 infection? (3) What proportion of SARS-CoV-2 transmission in a population is accounted for by people who are asymptomatic or presymptomatic? METHODS AND FINDINGS: The protocol was first published on 1 April 2020 and last updated on 18 June 2021. We searched PubMed, Embase, bioRxiv, and medRxiv, aggregated in a database of SARS-CoV-2 literature, most recently on 6 July 2021. Studies of people with PCR-diagnosed SARS-CoV-2, which documented symptom status at the beginning and end of follow-up, or mathematical modelling studies were included. Studies restricted to people already diagnosed, of single individuals or families, or without sufficient follow-up were excluded. One reviewer extracted data and a second verified the extraction, with disagreement resolved by discussion or a third reviewer. Risk of bias in empirical studies was assessed with a bespoke checklist and modelling studies with a published checklist. All data syntheses were done using random effects models. Review question (1): We included 130 studies. Heterogeneity was high so we did not estimate a mean proportion of asymptomatic infections overall (interquartile range (IQR) 14% to 50%, prediction interval 2% to 90%), or in 84 studies based on screening of defined populations (IQR 20% to 65%, prediction interval 4% to 94%). In 46 studies based on contact or outbreak investigations, the summary proportion asymptomatic was 19% (95% confidence interval (CI) 15% to 25%, prediction interval 2% to 70%). (2) The secondary attack rate in contacts of people with asymptomatic infection compared with symptomatic infection was 0.32 (95% CI 0.16 to 0.64, prediction interval 0.11 to 0.95, 8 studies). (3) In 13 modelling studies fit to data, the proportion of all SARS-CoV-2 transmission from presymptomatic individuals was higher than from asymptomatic individuals. Limitations of the evidence include high heterogeneity and high risks of selection and information bias in studies that were not designed to measure persistently asymptomatic infection, and limited information about variants of concern or in people who have been vaccinated. CONCLUSIONS: Based on studies published up to July 2021, most SARS-CoV-2 infections were not persistently asymptomatic, and asymptomatic infections were less infectious than symptomatic infections. Summary estimates from meta-analysis may be misleading when variability between studies is extreme and prediction intervals should be presented. Future studies should determine the asymptomatic proportion of SARS-CoV-2 infections caused by variants of concern and in people with immunity following vaccination or previous infection. Without prospective longitudinal studies with methods that minimise selection and measurement biases, further updates with the study types included in this living systematic review are unlikely to be able to provide a reliable summary estimate of the proportion of asymptomatic infections caused by SARS-CoV-2. REVIEW PROTOCOL: Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/9ewys/).


Assuntos
COVID-19 , Infecções Assintomáticas/epidemiologia , COVID-19/epidemiologia , Humanos , Programas de Rastreamento , Estudos Prospectivos , SARS-CoV-2
3.
PLoS Med ; 17(9): e1003346, 2020 09.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32960881

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: There is disagreement about the level of asymptomatic severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. We conducted a living systematic review and meta-analysis to address three questions: (1) Amongst people who become infected with SARS-CoV-2, what proportion does not experience symptoms at all during their infection? (2) Amongst people with SARS-CoV-2 infection who are asymptomatic when diagnosed, what proportion will develop symptoms later? (3) What proportion of SARS-CoV-2 transmission is accounted for by people who are either asymptomatic throughout infection or presymptomatic? METHODS AND FINDINGS: We searched PubMed, Embase, bioRxiv, and medRxiv using a database of SARS-CoV-2 literature that is updated daily, on 25 March 2020, 20 April 2020, and 10 June 2020. Studies of people with SARS-CoV-2 diagnosed by reverse transcriptase PCR (RT-PCR) that documented follow-up and symptom status at the beginning and end of follow-up or modelling studies were included. One reviewer extracted data and a second verified the extraction, with disagreement resolved by discussion or a third reviewer. Risk of bias in empirical studies was assessed with an adapted checklist for case series, and the relevance and credibility of modelling studies were assessed using a published checklist. We included a total of 94 studies. The overall estimate of the proportion of people who become infected with SARS-CoV-2 and remain asymptomatic throughout infection was 20% (95% confidence interval [CI] 17-25) with a prediction interval of 3%-67% in 79 studies that addressed this review question. There was some evidence that biases in the selection of participants influence the estimate. In seven studies of defined populations screened for SARS-CoV-2 and then followed, 31% (95% CI 26%-37%, prediction interval 24%-38%) remained asymptomatic. The proportion of people that is presymptomatic could not be summarised, owing to heterogeneity. The secondary attack rate was lower in contacts of people with asymptomatic infection than those with symptomatic infection (relative risk 0.35, 95% CI 0.10-1.27). Modelling studies fit to data found a higher proportion of all SARS-CoV-2 infections resulting from transmission from presymptomatic individuals than from asymptomatic individuals. Limitations of the review include that most included studies were not designed to estimate the proportion of asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections and were at risk of selection biases; we did not consider the possible impact of false negative RT-PCR results, which would underestimate the proportion of asymptomatic infections; and the database does not include all sources. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this living systematic review suggest that most people who become infected with SARS-CoV-2 will not remain asymptomatic throughout the course of the infection. The contribution of presymptomatic and asymptomatic infections to overall SARS-CoV-2 transmission means that combination prevention measures, with enhanced hand hygiene, masks, testing tracing, and isolation strategies and social distancing, will continue to be needed.


Assuntos
Infecções Assintomáticas/epidemiologia , Infecções por Coronavirus/epidemiologia , Pneumonia Viral/epidemiologia , Doenças Assintomáticas/epidemiologia , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , Infecções por Coronavirus/fisiopatologia , Infecções por Coronavirus/transmissão , Progressão da Doença , Humanos , Programas de Rastreamento , Pandemias , Pneumonia Viral/fisiopatologia , Pneumonia Viral/transmissão , Reação em Cadeia da Polimerase Via Transcriptase Reversa , SARS-CoV-2
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA