dc.creatorYovera-Aldana, Marlon
dc.creatorVelasquez-Rimachi, Victor
dc.creatorHuerta-Rosario, Andrely
dc.creatorMore-Yupanqui, M. D.
dc.creatorOsores-Flores, Mariela
dc.creatorEspinoza, Ricardo
dc.creatorGil-Olivares, Fradis
dc.creatorQuispe-Nolazco, Cesar
dc.creatorQuea-Velez, Flor
dc.creatorMoran-Mariños, Christian
dc.creatorPinedo-Torres, Isabel
dc.creatorAlva-Diaz, Carlos
dc.creatorPacheco-Barrios, Kevin
dc.date.accessioned2022-01-05T15:12:04Z
dc.date.accessioned2024-05-07T02:36:26Z
dc.date.available2022-01-05T15:12:04Z
dc.date.available2024-05-07T02:36:26Z
dc.date.created2022-01-05T15:12:04Z
dc.date.issued2021-05-01
dc.identifier10.1371/journal.pone.0251642
dc.identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10757/658462
dc.identifier19326203
dc.identifierPLoS ONE
dc.identifier2-s2.0-85105804130
dc.identifierSCOPUS_ID:85105804130
dc.identifier0000 0001 2196 144X
dc.identifier.urihttps://repositorioslatinoamericanos.uchile.cl/handle/2250/9327413
dc.description.abstractAims The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to estimate the prevalence and incidence of diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN) in Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC). Materials and methods We searched MEDLINE, SCOPUS, Web of Science, EMBASE and LILACS databases of published observational studies in LAC up to December 2020. Meta-analyses of proportions were performed using random-effects models using Stata Program 15.1. Heterogeneity was evaluated through sensitivity, subgroup, and meta-regression analyses. Evidence certainty was performed with the GRADE approach. Results Twenty-nine studies from eight countries were included. The estimated prevalence of DPN was 46.5% (95%CI: 38.0-55.0) with a significant heterogeneity (I2 = 98.2%; p<0.01). Only two studies reported incidence, and the pooled effect size was 13.7% (95%CI: 10.6-17.2). We found an increasing trend of cumulative DPN prevalence over time. The main sources of heterogeneity associated with higher prevalence were diagnosis criteria, higher A1c (%), and inadequate sample size. We judge the included evidence as very low certainty. Conclusion The overall prevalence of DPN is high in LAC with significant heterogeneity between and within countries that could be explained by population type and methodological aspects. Significant gaps (e.g., under-representation of most countries, lack of incidence studies, and heterogenous case definition) were identified. Standardized and population-based studies of DPN in LAC are needed.
dc.languageeng
dc.publisherPublic Library of Science
dc.relationhttps://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0251642
dc.rightshttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.rightsAttribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International
dc.sourceUniversidad Peruana de Ciencias Aplicadas (UPC)
dc.sourceRepositorio Academico - UPC
dc.sourcePLoS ONE
dc.source16
dc.source5 May
dc.titlePrevalence and incidence of diabetic peripheral neuropathy in Latin America and the Caribbean: A systematic review and metaanalysis
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/article


Este ítem pertenece a la siguiente institución