Fang Tang1, Gangpu Wang2, Ying Lian3. 1. Health Management Center, Qianfoshan Hospital Affiliated to Shandong University, Jinan, China. 2. Department of General Surgery, The Fourth Hospital of Jinan City, Jinan, China. 3. Department of Case Administration, Qianfoshan Hospital Affiliated to Shandong University, Jinan, China. Electronic address: lianying525@sina.com.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Epidemiological studies have repeatedly investigated the association between anxiety and metabolic syndrome (MetS). However, the results have been inconsistent. We performed a meta-analysis of observational studies to summarize the evidence regarding the relation of anxiety and MetS risk. METHODS: We performed a systematic literature search of all studies published in PubMed and EMBASE from its inception to June 2016. Cross-sectional and cohort studies that reported an association between the two conditions in adults were included. Data on prevalence, incidence, unadjusted or adjusted odds ratio (OR), and 95% CI were extracted or provided independently by the authors. Random effects model was used to report the pooled OR. The I2 statistic was used to assess heterogeneity. Egger's test and Begger's test were used to evaluate the publication bias. RESULTS: The search yielded 18 cross-sectional studies and two cohort studies. The pooled finding from cross-sectional studies showed that anxiety had a significant positive association with MetS (OR 1.07, 95% CI 1.01-1.12), with moderate heterogeneity (I2=45.7%, P=0.018). Findings from two cohort studies indicated that the association between anxiety and MetS was insignificant. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that there is an association between anxiety and MetS. In individuals with MetS anxiety should be detected and managed. Further prospective studies are needed to explore the bidirectional association between anxiety and MetS.
OBJECTIVE: Epidemiological studies have repeatedly investigated the association between anxiety and metabolic syndrome (MetS). However, the results have been inconsistent. We performed a meta-analysis of observational studies to summarize the evidence regarding the relation of anxiety and MetS risk. METHODS: We performed a systematic literature search of all studies published in PubMed and EMBASE from its inception to June 2016. Cross-sectional and cohort studies that reported an association between the two conditions in adults were included. Data on prevalence, incidence, unadjusted or adjusted odds ratio (OR), and 95% CI were extracted or provided independently by the authors. Random effects model was used to report the pooled OR. The I2 statistic was used to assess heterogeneity. Egger's test and Begger's test were used to evaluate the publication bias. RESULTS: The search yielded 18 cross-sectional studies and two cohort studies. The pooled finding from cross-sectional studies showed that anxiety had a significant positive association with MetS (OR 1.07, 95% CI 1.01-1.12), with moderate heterogeneity (I2=45.7%, P=0.018). Findings from two cohort studies indicated that the association between anxiety and MetS was insignificant. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that there is an association between anxiety and MetS. In individuals with MetS anxiety should be detected and managed. Further prospective studies are needed to explore the bidirectional association between anxiety and MetS.
Authors: Daniela Rebolledo-Solleiro; Gabriel Roldán-Roldán; Daniel Díaz; Myrian Velasco; Carlos Larqué; Guadalupe Rico-Rosillo; Gloria Bertha Vega-Robledo; Elena Zambrano; Marcia Hiriart; Miguel Pérez de la Mora Journal: PLoS One Date: 2017-05-02 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Fernanda Pedrotti Moreira; Karen Jansen; Taiane de A Cardoso; Thaíse C Mondin; Pedro V Magalhães; Flavio Kapczinski; Luciano D M Souza; Ricardo A da Silva; Jean Pierre Oses; Carolina D Wiener Journal: Braz J Psychiatry Date: 2018-10-11 Impact factor: 2.697
Authors: Ayanabha Chakraborti; Christopher Graham; Sophie Chehade; Bijal Vashi; Alan Umfress; Pradeep Kurup; Benjamin Vickers; H Alexander Chen; Rahul Telange; Taylor Berryhill; William Van Der Pol; Mickie Powell; Stephen Barnes; Casey Morrow; Daniel L Smith; M Shahid Mukhtar; Stephen Watts; Gregory Kennedy; James Bibb Journal: Front Neurosci Date: 2021-05-26 Impact factor: 4.677