Publication:
Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Incidence and Prevalence of Endometriosis

dc.contributor.authorSarria-Santamera, Antonio
dc.contributor.authorOrazumbekova, Binur
dc.contributor.authorTerzic, Milan
dc.contributor.authorIssanov, Alpamys
dc.contributor.authorChaowen, Chen
dc.contributor.authorAsúnsolo-Del-Barco, Ángel
dc.date.accessioned2022-09-06T12:09:13Z
dc.date.available2022-09-06T12:09:13Z
dc.date.issued2021
dc.description.abstractThere is still much controversy regarding the epidemiology of endometriosis. The objective of this work is to conduct a systematic review, and if possible, proceed with a meta-analysis of studies that have analyzed the incidence and prevalence of this condition among women in the general population. The inclusion criteria were papers published after 1997 that had reported data of the incidence or prevalence of endometriosis. The PubMed search engine was used to identify papers meeting the inclusion criteria from 1997 to 2019, with an additional manual search for the identification of potentially eligible studies. The search was limited to papers published in English. The risk of bias was assessed according to the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Checklist. As a result, 27 papers, which included a total of 28,660,652 women, were classified according to the type of design and sources of information in five subgroups. Pooled estimates of prevalence for studies with self-reported data were 0.05 (95% CI: 0.03; 0.06), 0.01 for population-based integrated information systems (95% CI: 0.01; 0.02), and 0.04 (95% CI 0.04; 0.05) in studies using other designs. The pooled incidence rate of endometriosis was: 1.36 per 1000 person-years (PY) (95% CI: 1.09; 1.63) for studies based on hospital discharges, 3.53 per 1000 PY (95% CI: 2.06; 4.99) for cohort studies, and 1.89 per 1000 PY (95% CI: 1.42; 2.37) for population-based integrated information systems. Meta-analysis indicated high heterogeneity based on I-squared statistics. This significant variability may not only be due to methodological issues and the specific limitations of the different designs and data analyzed, including case definitions and subject selection strategies, but also to the inherent heterogeneity of endometriosis. Epidemiological studies with appropriate study designs remain necessary to provide a valid estimation of the population burden of endometriosis.es_ES
dc.description.peerreviewedes_ES
dc.format.number1es_ES
dc.format.page29es_ES
dc.format.volume9es_ES
dc.identifier.citationHealthcare (Basel). 2021;9(1):29.es_ES
dc.identifier.doi10.3390/healthcare9010029es_ES
dc.identifier.issn2227-9032es_ES
dc.identifier.journalHealthcare (Basel, Switzerland)es_ES
dc.identifier.pubmedID33396813es_ES
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12105/14956
dc.language.isoenges_ES
dc.publisherMultidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute (MDPI)
dc.relation.publisherversionhttps://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare9010029es_ES
dc.repisalud.centroISCIII::Escuela Nacional de Sanidades_ES
dc.repisalud.institucionISCIIIes_ES
dc.rights.accessRightsopen accesses_ES
dc.rights.licenseAttribution 4.0 International*
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/*
dc.subjectEndometriosises_ES
dc.subjectEpidemiologyes_ES
dc.subjectStatisticses_ES
dc.subjectNumerical dataes_ES
dc.titleSystematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Incidence and Prevalence of Endometriosises_ES
dc.typeresearch articlees_ES
dc.type.hasVersionVoRes_ES
dspace.entity.typePublication
relation.isAuthorOfPublicationc6f06cf1-0889-40ae-9606-b761c25f3cde
relation.isAuthorOfPublication.latestForDiscoveryc6f06cf1-0889-40ae-9606-b761c25f3cde
relation.isPublisherOfPublication30293a55-0e53-431f-ae8c-14ab01127be9
relation.isPublisherOfPublication.latestForDiscovery30293a55-0e53-431f-ae8c-14ab01127be9

Files

Original bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
SystematicReviewMeta-AnalysisEndometriosis_2020.pdf
Size:
2.6 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description: