0
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Placental Changes and Neuropsychological Development in Children—A Systematic Review

      , , ,
      Cells
      MDPI AG

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Placental dysfunction may increase the offspring’s later-life disease risk. The objective of this systematic review was to describe associations between pathological placental changes and neuropsychological outcomes in children after the neonatal period. The inclusion criteria were human studies; original research; direct placental variables; neuropsychological outcomes; and analysis between their associations. The exclusion criterion was the offspring’s age—0–28 days or >19 years. The MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were last searched in May 2022. We utilized the ROBINS-I for the risk of bias assessment and performed a narrative synthesis. In total, 3252 studies were identified, out of which 16 were included (i.e., a total of 15,862 participants). Half of the studies were performed on children with neonatal complications, and 75% of the studies reported an association between a placental change and an outcome; however, following the completion of the funnel plots, a risk of publication bias was indicated. The largest study described a small association between placental size and a risk of psychiatric symptoms in boys only. Inconsistency between the studies limited the evidence in this review. In general, no strong evidence was found for an association between pathological placental changes and childhood neuropsychological outcomes after the neonatal period. However, the association between placental size and mental health in boys indicates a placental sexual dimorphism, thereby suggesting an increased vulnerability for male fetuses.

          Related collections

          Most cited references114

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement

          Systematic reviews should build on a protocol that describes the rationale, hypothesis, and planned methods of the review; few reviews report whether a protocol exists. Detailed, well-described protocols can facilitate the understanding and appraisal of the review methods, as well as the detection of modifications to methods and selective reporting in completed reviews. We describe the development of a reporting guideline, the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses for Protocols 2015 (PRISMA-P 2015). PRISMA-P consists of a 17-item checklist intended to facilitate the preparation and reporting of a robust protocol for the systematic review. Funders and those commissioning reviews might consider mandating the use of the checklist to facilitate the submission of relevant protocol information in funding applications. Similarly, peer reviewers and editors can use the guidance to gauge the completeness and transparency of a systematic review protocol submitted for publication in a journal or other medium.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions

            Non-randomised studies of the effects of interventions are critical to many areas of healthcare evaluation, but their results may be biased. It is therefore important to understand and appraise their strengths and weaknesses. We developed ROBINS-I (“Risk Of Bias In Non-randomised Studies - of Interventions”), a new tool for evaluating risk of bias in estimates of the comparative effectiveness (harm or benefit) of interventions from studies that did not use randomisation to allocate units (individuals or clusters of individuals) to comparison groups. The tool will be particularly useful to those undertaking systematic reviews that include non-randomised studies.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              The worldwide prevalence of ADHD: a systematic review and metaregression analysis.

              The worldwide prevalence estimates of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD)/hyperkinetic disorder (HD) are highly heterogeneous. Presently, the reasons for this discrepancy remain poorly understood. The purpose of this study was to determine the possible causes of the varied worldwide estimates of the disorder and to compute its worldwide-pooled prevalence. The authors searched MEDLINE and PsycINFO databases from January 1978 to December 2005 and reviewed textbooks and reference lists of the studies selected. Authors of relevant articles from North America, South America, Europe, Africa, Asia, Oceania, and the Middle East and ADHD/HD experts were contacted. Surveys were included if they reported point prevalence of ADHD/HD for subjects 18 years of age or younger from the general population or schools according to DSM or ICD criteria. The literature search generated 9,105 records, and 303 full-text articles were reviewed. One hundred and two studies comprising 171,756 subjects from all world regions were included. The ADHD/HD worldwide-pooled prevalence was 5.29%. This estimate was associated with significant variability. In the multivariate metaregression model, diagnostic criteria, source of information, requirement of impairment for diagnosis, and geographic origin of the studies were significantly associated with ADHD/HD prevalence rates. Geographic location was associated with significant variability only between estimates from North America and both Africa and the Middle East. No significant differences were found between Europe and North America. Our findings suggest that geographic location plays a limited role in the reasons for the large variability of ADHD/HD prevalence estimates worldwide. Instead, this variability seems to be explained primarily by the methodological characteristics of studies.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                (View ORCID Profile)
                (View ORCID Profile)
                Journal
                CELLC6
                Cells
                Cells
                MDPI AG
                2073-4409
                February 2023
                January 28 2023
                : 12
                : 3
                : 435
                Article
                10.3390/cells12030435
                36766778
                14552cd1-98a7-4647-b1d4-da36be9bef5e
                © 2023

                https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article