Is Greenness Associated with Dementia? A Systematic Review and Dose-Response Meta-analysis.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: We assessed the relation between environmental greenness and risk of dementia and cognitive impairment, based on a systematic review and meta-analysis up to March 30, 2022, characterizing whenever possible the shape of the association using dose-response meta-analysis. RECENT FINDINGS: Twelve studies were included in this review, either using normalized difference vegetation index (NDVI) or land use/cover (LU/LC) methodology to assess greenness. Comparing the highest versus lowest exposure categories of greenness assessed using the NDVI (6 studies) or LU/LC (6 studies), we found no association with dementia. Dose-response meta-analysis of the association between greenness measured by LU/LC and dementia, based on only 3 studies, indicated a U-shaped association, but estimates were imprecise. Our systematic review and meta-analysis provided some evidence of a slight inverse association between greenness and dementia at intermediate exposure levels, but not at high levels. Potential methodological limitations, such as exposure misclassification and unmeasured confounding, may have affected the results.

Zinc and selenium supplementation in COVID-19 prevention and treatment: a systematic review of the experimental studies.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: The COVID-19 pandemic has severely affected the world's population in the last two years. Along with non-pharmacological public health interventions, major efforts have also been made to identify effective drugs or active substances for COVID-19 prevention and treatment. These include, among many others, the trace elements zinc and selenium, based on laboratory studies and some observational human studies. However, both of these study designs are not adequate to identify and approve treatments in human medicine, and experimental studies in the form of randomized controlled trials are needed to demonstrate the effectiveness and the safety of any interventions. METHODS: We undertook a systematic review in which we searched for published and unpublished clinical trials using zinc or selenium supplementation to treat or prevent COVID-19 in the Pubmed, Scopus and ClinicalTrials databases up to 10 January 2022. RESULTS: Amongst the published studies, we did not find any trial with selenium, whereas we retrieved four eligible randomized clinical trials using zinc supplementation, only one of which was double-blind. One of these trials looked at the effect of the intervention on the rate of new SARS-CoV-2 infections, and three at the COVID-19 clinical outcome in already infected individuals. The study populations of the four trials were very heterogeneous, ranging from uninfected individuals to those hospitalized for COVID-19. Only two studies investigated zinc alone in the intervention arm with no differences in the endpoints. The other two studies examined zinc in association with one or more drugs and supplements in the intervention arm, therefore making it impossible to disentangle any specific effects of the element. In addition, we identified 22 unpublished ongoing clinical trials, 19 on zinc, one on selenium and two on both elements. CONCLUSION: No trials investigated the effect of selenium supplementation on COVID-19, while the very few studies on the effects of zinc supplementation did not confirm efficacy. Therefore, preventive or therapeutic interventions against COVID-19 based on zinc or selenium supplementation are currently unjustified, although when the results of the on-going studies are published, this may change our conclusion.

An assessment of case-fatality and infection-fatality rates of first and second COVID-19 waves in Italy.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: The exact COVID-19 severity is still not well defined and it is hotly debated due to the a few methodological issues such as the uncertainties about the spread of the SARS-CoV-2 infection. METHODS: We investigated COVID-19 case-fatality rate and infection-fatality rate in 2020 in Italy, a country severely affected by the pandemic, basing our assessment on publicly available data, and calculating such measures during the first and second waves. RESULTS: We found that province-specific crude case-fatality rate in the first wave (February-July 2020) had a median value of 12.0%. Data about infection-fatality rate was more difficult to compute, due to large underestimation of SARS-CoV-2 infection during the first wave when asymptomatic individuals were very rarely tested. However, when using as a reference population-based seroprevalence data for anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies collected in May-July 2020, we computed an infection-fatality rate of 2.2%. During the second wave (Sep-Dec 2020), when SARS-CoV-2 testing was greatly increased and extended to many asymptomatic individuals, we could only compute a 'hybrid' case/infection-fatality rate with a value of 2.2%, similar to the infection-fatality rate of the first wave. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, this study allowed to assess the COVID-19 case- and infection-fatality rates in Italy before of variant spread and vaccine availability, confirming their high values compared with other airborne infections like influenza. Our findings for Italy were similar to those characterizing other Western European countries.