Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31745178›Full record

SynthesisScientific reports2019

Prevalence and progression of rheumatic heart disease: a global systematic review and meta-analysis of population-based echocardiographic studies.

Jean Jacques Noubiap, Valirie N Agbor, Jean Joel Bigna, Arnaud D Kaze, Ulrich Flore Nyaga, Bongani M Mayosi

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Scientific reports, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 63 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
63citing papers in PubMed, 7 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

63 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. The global burden of rheumatic heart disease: 1990-2021.Clinical medicine (London, England) · 2026
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

3 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Jean Jacques NoubiapCentre for Heart Rhythm Disorders, University of Adelaide and Royal Adelaide Hospital, Adelaide, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7722-9757
Valirie N AgborNuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6708-6852
Jean Joel BignaDepartment of Epidemiology and Public Health, Centre Pasteur of Cameroon, Yaoundé, Cameroon. bignarimjj@yahoo.fr.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8018-6279
Arnaud D KazeDepartment of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Ulrich Flore NyagaDepartment of Internal Medicine and Specialties, Faculty of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, University of Yaoundé I, Yaoundé, Cameroon.
Bongani M MayosiCentre for Heart Rhythm Disorders, University of Adelaide and Royal Adelaide Hospital, Adelaide, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6641-8950

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to provide a contemporaneous estimate of the global burden of rheumatic heart disease (RHD) from echocardiographic population-based studies. We searched multiple databases between January 01, 1996 and October 17, 2017. Random-effect meta-analysis was used to pool data. We included 82 studies (1,090,792 participant) reporting data on the prevalence of RHD and 9 studies on the evolution of RHD lesions. The pooled prevalence of RHD was 26.1‰ (95%CI 19.2-33.1) and 11.3‰ (95%CI 7.2-16.2) for studies which used the World Heart Federation (WHF) and World Health Organization (WHO) criteria, respectively. The prevalence of RHD varied inversely with the level of a country's income, was lower with the WHO criteria compared to the WHF criteria, and was lowest in South East Asia. Definite RHD progressed in 7.5% (95% CI 1.5-17.6) of the cases, while 60.7% (95% CI 42.4-77.5) of cases remained stable over the course of follow-up. The proportion of cases borderline RHD who progressed to definite RHD was 11.3% (95% CI 6.9-16.5). The prevalence of RHD across WHO regions remains high. The highest prevalence of RHD was noted among studies which used the WHF diagnostic criteria. Definite RHD tends to progress or remain stable over time.

Indexed as

Disease ProgressionEchocardiographyHeart ValvesHumansMass ScreeningPrevalenceRheumatic Heart Disease

Identifiers

PMID31745178
PMCPMC6863880

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.