BackgroundWhether diabetes increases the risk of Parkinson's disease (PD) is still inconclusive. The objective of this updated meta-analysis is to synthesize evidence from case-control studies that evaluated the association between diabetes and the risk of PD.MethodsSeven databases were searched to identify case-control studies that evaluated the association between diabetes and PD. The methodological quality of included studies was assessed using Newcastle-Ottawa scale. All data were analyzed using Review Manager 5.1 software. Subgroup analyses were also adopted, according to stratification on gender, geographic location, source of the control group, smoking, anti-diabetes drug prescription and duration of DM.ResultsFourteen studies fulfilled inclusion criteria for meta-analysis, yielding a total of 21395 PD patients and 84579 control subjects. Individuals with diabetes were found to have a negative association with future PD (OR 0.75; 95% CI 0.58–0.98) in spite of significant heterogeneity. In subgroup analyses, the negative correlation was still found in studies from North America, non-PD control groups from general population, never smoking individuals, and DM ascertainment based on questionnaire or self-report. Stratification of gender and DM duration showed no significant association. No association was also found in European and Asian individuals, hospital-based controls, ever smoking subjects, DM assessment by medical record or physician diagnosis, and insulin prescription for DM.ConclusionEvidence from case-control studies suggested that diabetic individuals may have a decreased incidence of PD despite significant heterogeneity. More researches are warranted to clarify an understanding of the association between diabetes and risk of PD.

No abstract

No abstract

Aim: To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the current evidence available regarding the promoting blood circulation and removing blood stasis (PBCRBS) therapy for Chinese patients with acute intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH). Methods: Six databases were searched from their inception to November 2013. The studies assessed in ≥4 domains with 'yes' were selected for detailed assessment and meta-analysis. The herbal compositions for PBCRBS therapy for acute ICH patients were also assessed.Results: From the 6 databases, 292 studies claimed randomized-controlled clinical trials (RCTs). Nine studies with 798 individuals were assessed in ≥4 domains with 'yes' by using the Cochrane RoB tool. Meta-analysis showed that PBCRBS monotherapy and adjuvant therapy for acute ICH could improve the neurological function deficit, reduce the volume of hematoma and perihematomal edema, and lower the mortality rate and dependency. Moreover, there were fewer adverse effects when compared with Western conventional medication controls. Xueshuantong Injection and Fufang Danshen Injection, Buyang Huanwu Decoction and Liangxue Tongyu formula, and three herbs (danshen root, sanqi and leech) were the most commonly used Chinese herbal patent injections, herbal prescriptions and single herbs, respectively. Conclusion: Despite the apparently positive findings, it is premature to conclude that there is sufficient efficacy and safety of PBCRBS for ICH because of the high clinical heterogeneity of the included studies and small number of trials in the meta-analysis. Further large sample-sizes and rigorously designed RCTs are needed.

BackgroundInsomnia is a widespread human health problem, but there currently are the limitations of conventional therapies available. Suanzaoren decoction (SZRD) is a well known classic Chinese herbal prescription for insomnia and has been treating people’s insomnia for more than thousand years. The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of SZRD for insomnia.MethodsA systematic literature search was performed for 6 databases up to July of 2012 to identify randomized control trials (RCTs) involving SZRD for insomniac patients. The methodological quality of RCTs was assessed independently using the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions.ResultsTwelve RCTs with total of 1376 adult participants were identified. The methodological quality of all included trials are no more than 3/8 score. Majority of the RCTs concluded that SZRD was more significantly effective than benzodiazepines for treating insomnia. Despite these positive outcomes, there were many methodological shortcomings in the studies reviewed, including insufficient information about randomization generation and absence of allocation concealment, lack of blinding and no placebo control, absence of intention-to-treat analysis and lack of follow-ups, selective publishing and reporting, and small number of sample sizes. A number of clinical heterogeneity such as diagnosis, intervention, control, and outcome measures were also reviewed. Only 3 trials reported adverse events, whereas the other 9 trials did not provide the safety information.ConclusionsDespite the apparent reported positive findings, there is insufficient evidence to support efficacy of SZRD for insomnia due to the poor methodological quality and the small number of trials of the included studies. SZRD seems generally safe, but is insufficient evidence to make conclusions on the safety because fewer studies reported the adverse events. Further large sample-size and well-designed RCTs are needed.