Prevalence and Clinical Characteristics of Sleeping Paralysis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Sleep paralysis (SP) is a mixed state of consciousness and sleep, combining features of rapid eye movement (REM) sleep with those of wakefulness. The exact cause of SP is unknown, and its prevalence varies among the studies. We aim to identify SP's global prevalence, the affected population's characteristics, and the SP's clinical picture. We searched three databases (PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science (WoS)) using a unique search strategy to identify eligible studies. All observational studies identifying the prevalence or frequency of sleeping paralysis were included. No exclusions are made based on country, race, or questionnaire. The analysis was performed using the latest version of R software (R Core Team, Vienna, Austria). The analysis included 76 studies from 25 countries with 167,133 participants. The global prevalence of SP was 30% (95% CI (22%, 39%)). There were similar frequencies of isolated SP and SP (33%, 95% CI (26%, 42%), I2 = 97%, P <0.01; 31%, 95% CI (21%, 43%), I2 = 100%, P = 0, respectively). A subgroup analysis showed that the majority of those who experienced SP were psychiatric patients (35%, 95% CI (20%, 55%), I2 = 96%, P <0.01). The prevalence among non-psychiatric patients was among students (34%, 95% CI (23%, 47%), I2 = 100%, P = 0). Auditory and visual hallucinations were reported in 24.25% of patients. Around 4% had only visual hallucinations. Meta-regression showed no association between the frequency of SP and sex. Publication bias was detected among the included studies through visual inspection of funnel plot asymmetry. Our findings revealed that 30% of the population suffered from SP, especially psychiatric patients and students. The majority of SP cases lacked associated hallucinations, while a noteworthy proportion experienced combined visual and auditory hallucinations.

Efficacy and safety of calcium channel blockers in preventing cardiac siderosis in thalassemia patients: An updated meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Iron overload in patients with thalassemia represents a serious complication by affecting numerous organ systems. This meta-analysis aims to establish an evidence regarding the effect of amlodipine on cardiac iron overload in thalassemia patients. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Central, and EMBASE for all relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The primary outcomes were cardiac T2* and myocardial iron concentration (MIC). Secondary outcomes were liver iron concentration (LIC), risk of Gastrointestinal (G.I.) upset and risk of lower limb edema. We used Hedges' g to pool continuous outcomes, while odds ratio was used for dichotomous outcomes. RESULTS: Seven RCTs were eligible for this systematic review and meta-analysis, comprising of 233 patients included in the analysis. Amlodipine had a statistically significant lower MIC (Hedges' g = -0.82, 95% confidence interval [CI] [-1.40, -0.24], p < .001) and higher cardiac T2* (Hedges' g = 0.36, 95% CI [0.10, 0.62], p = .03). Amlodipine was comparable to standard chelation therapy in terms of the risk of lower limb edema and GI upset. CONCLUSION: Our meta-analysis found that amlodipine significantly increases cardiac T2* and decreases MIC, hence decreasing the incidence of cardiomyopathy-related iron overload in thalassemia patients.

COVID-19 Risk Perception and Adherence to Preventive Measures among Medical Students after Receiving COVID-19 Vaccination: A Multicenter Cross-Sectional Study in Egypt.

This study aimed to assess the perception of COVID-19 risk and the adherence to protective measures among medical students after vaccination. We conducted a cross-sectional survey on a convenience sample of students from all the 18 governmental medical schools in Egypt. A total of 2273 students participated in the online self-administered questionnaire. Around 8 in 10 (83.2%) students were fully vaccinated, of which 17.9% received the booster dose. Only 36.9% believed that COVID-19 is serious on the individual level. The majority (73.9%) strongly or slightly agreed they may become infected after vaccination if they do not follow the preventive measures. We observed a slow decline in the perceived risk of vulnerability and susceptibility to COVID-19 infection among students in parallel to a growing perception of self-efficacy and controllability. Less than one-third (28.9%) of students showed good adherence to protective measures. However, this was lower than the previously reported adherence in the same population before vaccination. Female students, those in the first academic year, those who did not contract COVID-19 infection before, and those with a higher perception of susceptibility and perceived controllability were more likely to perform better at protective measures.