@article {4434, title = {Identifying obesity and COVID-19 overlapping risk-factors: Protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis}, journal = {J Public Health Res}, volume = {11}, number = {3}, year = {2022}, note = {Pereira, Margarida
Bakkeli, Nan Zou
Dimka, Jessica
Mamelund, Svenn-Erik
eng
2022/09/10
J Public Health Res. 2022 Aug 23;11(3):22799036221106584. doi: 10.1177/22799036221106584. eCollection 2022 Jul.}, month = {Jul}, pages = {22799036221106584}, edition = {20220823}, abstract = {This systematic review main goal is to identify the common risk factors of obesity and COVID-19 overall, and highlight the ones related to urban settings specifically, using a syndemic framework. COVID-19 highlighted the interaction between infectious diseases and non-communicable diseases. We hypothesise that obesity and COVID-19 share determinants, thus our main goal is to identify the overlapping risk factors and their magnitude of association with both health outcomes. Literature search was conducted in Medline and Embase, Cochrane Library and Epistemonikos, Web of Science and Scopus, ASSIA and SocINDEX and, Google Scholar, in June 2021. Covidence will be used to conduct the title and abstract, and full-text screening, considering the following inclusion criteria: (a) study addresses both health outcomes, (b) full-length articles, (c) study focuses on humans and (d) studies in English. The exclusion criteria will be: (a) study addresses one of the outcomes in combination with other pathologies, (b) not full-length article, (c) study focuses on animals, (d) study not written in English, (e) study focuses on treatment (pharmacological or other), testing (prognostic) or specific patients with other pathologies and (f) study focussed in clinical and/or physiological mechanisms associated with obesity and/or COVID-19. The included studies will be assessed for quality using the Effective Public Health Practice Project for quantitative studies and the tool described by Hawker for qualitative studies. Qualitative results will be assessed using thematic analysis methods to synthesise findings and presented in summary tables. Quantitative results - meta-analysis - will be analysed and presented using Q test and Funnel Plot.}, keywords = {Covid-19, obesity, risk factors, syndemic, systematic review}, isbn = {2279-9028 (Print)
2279-9036 (Electronic)
2279-9028 (Linking)}, author = {Pereira, M. and Bakkeli, N. Z. and Dimka, J. and Mamelund, S. E.} } @article {4447, title = {Factors associated with the donation and non-donation of embryos for research: a systematic review}, journal = {Hum Reprod UpdateHum Reprod Update}, volume = {20}, number = {5}, year = {2014}, note = {Samorinha, Catarina
Pereira, Margarida
Machado, Helena
Figueiredo, Barbara
Silva, Susana
eng
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov{\textquoteright}t
Systematic Review
England
2014/06/08
Hum Reprod Update. 2014 Sep-Oct;20(5):641-55. doi: 10.1093/humupd/dmu026. Epub 2014 Jun 6.}, month = {Sep-Oct}, pages = {641-55}, edition = {20140606}, abstract = {BACKGROUND: Systematic knowledge on the factors that influence the decisions of IVF users regarding embryo donation for research is a core need for patient-centred policies and ethics in clinical practice. However, no systematic review has been provided on the motivations of patients who must decide embryo disposition. This paper fills this gap, presenting a systematic review of quantitative and qualitative studies, which synthesizes the current body of knowledge on the factors and reasons associated with IVF patients{\textquoteright} decisions to donate or not to donate embryos for research. METHODS: A systematic search of studies indexed in PubMed, ISI WoK and PsycINFO, published before November 2013, was conducted. Only empirical, peer-reviewed, full-length, original studies reporting data on factors and reasons associated with the decision concerning donation or non-donation of embryos for research were included. Eligibility and data extraction were performed by two independent researchers and disagreements were resolved by discussion or a third reviewer, if required. The main quantitative findings were extracted and synthesized and qualitative data were assessed by thematic content analysis. RESULTS: A total of 39 studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in the review. More than half of the studies (n = 21) used a quantitative methodology, and the remaining were qualitative (n = 15) or mixed-methods (n = 3) studies. The studies were derived mainly from European countries (n = 18) and the USA (n = 11). The proportion of IVF users who donated embryos for research varied from 7\% in a study in France to 73\% in a Swiss study. Those who donate embryos for research reported feelings of reciprocity towards science and medicine, positive views of research and high levels of trust in the medical system. They described their decision as better than the destruction of embryos and as an opportunity to help others or to improve health and IVF treatments. The perception of risks, the lack of information concerning research projects and the medical system and the conceptualization of embryos in terms of personhood were the most relevant motives for not donating embryos for research. Results relating to the influence of sociodemographic characteristics and reproductive and gynaecological history were mostly inconclusive. CONCLUSIONS: Three iterative and dynamic dimensions of the IVF patients{\textquoteright} decision to donate or not to donate embryos for research emerged from this review: the hierarquization of the possible options regarding embryo disposition, according to the moral, social and instrumental status attributed to embryos; patients{\textquoteright} understanding of expectations and risks of the research on human embryos; and patients{\textquoteright} experiences of information exchange and levels of trust in the medical-scientific institutions.}, keywords = {assisted reproductive technologies, Decision Making, embryo disposition, Embryo Disposition/ethics/*psychology, Embryo Research/*ethics, Emotions, Female, Fertilization in Vitro/psychology, Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice, human embryo research, Humans, in vitro fertilization, Motivation, Reproductive History, systematic review, Tissue Donors/*psychology}, isbn = {1460-2369 (Electronic)
1355-4786 (Linking)}, author = {Samorinha, C. and Pereira, M. and Machado, H. and Figueiredo, B. and Silva, S.} }