SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Association between Anemia and Risk of Parkinson Disease.

Behav Neurol · 2021-07-07

DOI: 10.1155/2021/8360627PMID: 34306250

Open accessMeta-Analysis; research-article; Systematic Review; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by

MethodsWe systematically searched articles on electronic databases such as PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Google Scholar between January 1, 2000 and July 30, 2020. Articles were independently evaluated by two authors. We included observational studies (case-control and cohort) and calculated the risk ratios (RRs) for associated with anemia and PD. Heterogeneity among the studies was assessed using the Q and I 2 statistic. We utilized the random-effect model to calculate the overall RR with 95% CI.ResultsA total of 342 articles were identified in the initial searches, and 7 full-text articles were evaluated for eligibility. Three articles were further excluded for prespecified reasons including insufficient data and duplications, and 4 articles were included in our systematic review and meta-analysis. A random effect model meta-analysis of all 4 studies showed no increased risk of PD in patients with anemia (N = 4, RRadjusted = 1.17 (95% CI: 0.94-1.45, p = 0.15). However, heterogeneity among the studies was significant (I 2 = 92.60, p = N = 3, RRadjusted = 1.14 (95% CI: 0.83-1.57, p = 0.40) as compared to male patients with anemia (N = 3, RRadjusted = 1.09 (95% CI: 0.83-1.42, p = 0.51).ConclusionThis is the first meta-analysis that shows that anemia is associated with higher risk of PD when compared with patients without anemia. However, more studies are warranted to evaluate the risk of PD among patients with anemia.

Scientific assessment

01

Research question

Assess the question within the original study’s scope.

02

Methods & sample

Check the source article for study design and sample details.

03

Key findings

An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.

04

Limitations

Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.

Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.