ABSTRACT
Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) are widely found in the environment, and comparing to adults, children are more vulnerable to PAHs exposure. Urinary metabolites of PAHs are used as preferred biomarkers to estimate the PAHs exposure. Systematic review on the internal exposure level of children and adolescents is rare. We aimed to calculate the internal exposure levels of PAHs in children and adolescents and compare the levels of PAHs internal exposure in various children groups. We searched PubMed, OVID, Web of Science, EBSCO, ACS, and four Chinese databases, and all studies examining the urinary concentrations of PAHs in children and adolescent were identified. The total exposure level of 11 PAHs metabolites were pooled. Standard mean difference (SMD) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of PAHs urinary concentration were calculated and pooled by RevMan5.3 to compare the exposure levels of different children groups. We found that 1-OHPyr, 2-OHNap, 2-OHFlu, 3-OHPhe, and 4-OHPhe were five PAHs metabolites most commonly studied in existing studies in children, and their total exposure levels were 0.38 ± 0.98, 2.32 ± 4.83, 0.81 ± 1.54, 0.09 ± 0.14, 0.03 ± 0.10 μmol/mol creatinine, respectively. The meta-analysis showed that the levels of 1-OHPyr were higher in higher environmental exposure group (SMD = 0.21, 95% CI = 0.03~0.40), ETS exposure group (SMD = 0.31, 95% CI = 0.08~0.54), and 6~11 years group (SMD = 0.16, 95% CI = 0.09~0.24); the level of 2-OHNap (SMD = 0.27, 95% CI = 0.01~0.53) was higher in higher environmental exposure group; however, the levels of 3-OHPhe (SMD = - 0.34, 95% CI = - 0.57~- 0.12) and 4-OHPhe (SMD = - 0.48, 95% CI = - 0.69~- 0.28) were higher in lower environmental exposure group. The levels of 1-OHPyr (SMD = - 0.01, 95% CI = - 0.11~0.10) and 2-OHNap (SMD = 0.01, 95% CI = - 0.20~0.22) were not statistically different between boys and girls. In conclusions, we found that the internal diversity of PAHs existed in children and adolescents, and the level of 1-OHPyr in children and adolescents was in higher status compared with non-occupational people who do not smoke.
ABSTRACT
To assess the methodology and report quality of Chinese systematic reviews /Meta-analysis on immunization.Methods: All literatures of systematic reviews/Meta-analysis on immunization were searched in the four Chinese databases:CNKI,WANFANG Database,VIP and CBM from the establishment date to November 2013.Methodology quality and report quality of included reviews were evaluated by R-AMSTAR scale and PRISMA scale.Results:32 literatures were identified.The main problems of methodology quality were insufficient in a comprehensive literature search , lack of the list of excluded studies and the selection process ,lack of the documented assessment of the scientific quality of included studies and the appropriate use of the scientific quality in forming conclusions , inappropriate dealing with heterogeneity of data , insufficient in control of publication bias.The main problems of report quality were incomplete report in abstract , inclusion and exclusion criteria , data collection and analysis methods , result and discussion.Conclusion: The methodology quality and report quality of included literatures have more or less flaws in different levels.Further improvement of methodological quality and reporting is required in order to increase the quality of these studies .
ABSTRACT
Objective: To assess the quality for meta-analysis on prevention and treatment of coronary artery disease (CAD) in China. Methods: We systemically searched 4 Chinese databases of VIP, CNKI, CBM and Wan Fang for their meta-analysis on CAD prevention and treatment from 1987-01 to 2013-10. According to inclusion and exclusion criteria, 2 researchers independently screened and cross-checked all the literatures. The qualities of methodology and report were evaluated by R-AMSTAR and PRISMA scales. Results: A total of 201 literatures were enrolled for our study. The average score of methodology quality was (24.65±3.97), no literature met all required items, and the major problems were as lack of“a priori design”, insufifcient and bias of data selection combining inappropriate data synthesis. The average score of report quality was (17.20 ± 2.90), no literature met all 27 required items, and the major problems were as incomplete report of abstract, objective, protocol and registration, incomplete data collection/analysis, using and publishing bias information, incomplete quality assessment. Conclusion: Both of methodology and report of meta-analysis for CAD prevention and treatment have quality problems at different levels, further improvement should be expected.