Design & Methodology of the Isle of Youth Community-Based Epidemiological Study of CKD, Cardio-cerebral Vascular Disease, Hypertension, and Diabetes Mellitus (ISYS).

MEDICC Rev


Method: 96.6% of the Isle of Youth's total population (80,117 inhabitants) was studied, all ages and both sexes, November 15, 2004-April 30, 2006. The public was offered general information on the objectives and benefits of the study, and participants provided informed consent. Active screening was performed via personal interview questionnaire and urine sample to determine markers of kidney damage: proteinuria and hematuria (Combur-10-Test) and microalbuminuria (Micral-Test), according to a diagnostic algorithm. For those testing positive for any marker, serum creatinine was studied and glomerular filtration rate (GFR) calculated - in adults by Cockcroft-Gault and Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD) formulas and in children aged <15 years, by Schwartz - to stratify CKD by stages. Blood pressure, height, weight, and body mass index (BMI) were determined.

Expected Results: Prevalence of kidney damage markers in general population and risk groups; relationship in population between CKD and cardio-cerebral vascular disease, diabetes mellitus, hypertension, and other risk factors; comparison of Cockcroft-Gault and Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD) formulas for measuring the GFR and their application to studies involving mass population screenings; and stratification of CKD in population.

Conclusions: ISYS Phase I, active screening of markers for renal damage was concluded using the methodology described above; results are pending publication. (Abstract) Erratum Almaguer López M, Herrera Valdés R, Chipi Cabrera J, Toirac Cabrera X, Castellanos Rabanal O, Bacallao Gallestey J. Design & methodology of the Isle of Youth community-based epidemiological study of CKD, cardio-cerebral vascular disease, hypertension, and diabetes mellitus (ISYS). MEDICC Review. 2007;9(1):23-9. The correct formula for MDRD appearing on page 27 is: MDRD GFR = 186.3 x serum creatinine (mg/dL)-1.154 x age-0.203 x 0.742 for females x 1.21 if the person is black.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.37757/MR2007V9.N1.7DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

isle youth
12
cardio-cerebral vascular
8
vascular disease
8
hypertension diabetes
8
diabetes mellitus
8
design methodology
4
isle
4
methodology isle
4
youth community-based
4
community-based epidemiological
4

Similar Publications

Evaluating ADHD medication trial representativeness: a Swedish population-based study comparing hypothetically trial-eligible and trial-ineligible individuals.

Lancet Psychiatry

January 2025

Developmental Evidence synthesis, Prediction, Implementation lab, Centre for Innovation in Mental Health, Faculty of Environmental and Life Sciences, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK; Hampshire and Isle of Wight NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK; Clinical and Experimental Sciences (CNS and Psychiatry), Faculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK; Hassenfeld Children's Hospital at NYU Langone, New York University Child Study Center, New York City, NY, USA; DiMePRe-J-Department of Precision and Regenerative Medicine-Jonic Area, University of Bari Aldo Moro, Bari, Italy.

Background: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating ADHD medications often use strict eligibility criteria, potentially limiting generalisability to patients in real-world clinical settings. We aimed to identify the proportion of individuals with ADHD who would be ineligible for medication RCTs and evaluate differences in treatment patterns and clinical and functional outcomes between RCT-eligible and RCT-ineligible individuals.

Methods: We used multiple Swedish national registries to identify individuals with ADHD, aged at least 4 years at the age of diagnosis, initiating pharmacological treatment between Jan 1, 2007, and Dec 31, 2019, with follow-up up to Dec 31, 2020.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Importance: Amid escalating mental health challenges among young individuals, intensified by the COVID-19 pandemic, analyzing postpandemic trends is critical.

Objective: To examine mental health care utilization and prescription rates for children, adolescents, and young adults before and after the COVID-19 pandemic.

Design, Setting, And Participants: This population-based time trend study used an interrupted time series analysis to examine mental health care and prescription patterns among the French population 25 years and younger.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Comparative efficacy and acceptability of pharmacological, psychological, and neurostimulatory interventions for ADHD in adults: a systematic review and component network meta-analysis.

Lancet Psychiatry

January 2025

Hampshire and Isle of Wight NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK; Clinical and Experimental Sciences (CNS and Psychiatry), Faculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK; Developmental EPI Evidence Synthesis, Prediction, Implementation Lab, Centre for Innovation in Mental Health-School of Psychology, Faculty of Environmental and Life Sciences, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK; New York University Child Study Center, Hassenfeld Children's Hospital at NYU Langone, New York, NY, USA; Department of Precision and Regenerative Medicine and Ionian Area, University of Studies of Bari Aldo Moro, Bari, Italy.

Background: The comparative benefits and harms of available interventions for ADHD in adults remain unclear. We aimed to address these important knowledge gaps.

Methods: In this systematic review and component network meta-analysis (NMA), we searched multiple databases for published and unpublished randomised controlled trials (RCTs) investigating pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions for ADHD in adults from database inception to Sept 6, 2023.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

): .

BMJ Ment Health

December 2024

SCIENCES lab, Department of Psychiatry, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.

Systematic reviews and meta-analyses have become crucial for evidence-based decision-making in recent decades. However, it is common for the results of multiple reviews on the same topic to be inconsistent, and it is widely recognised that the results of the reviews are not always effectively communicated to healthcare professionals and the lay public. This manuscript proposes a strategy to summarise and communicate the findings of previous systematic reviews and meta-analyses to wider audiences.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!