Background and Aims During the current Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, patients with diabetes face disproportionately more. This study was performed to clarify anti-inflammatory effects of anti-diabetic agents on COVID-19 in patients with diabetes. Methods and Results Relevant literature was searched on 15 databases up to November 14, 2020 and was updated on April 13, 2021. The pooled ORs along with 95% CIs were calculated to evaluate combined effects. 31 studies with 66,914 patients were included in qualitative and quantitative synthesis. Meta-analysis showed that metformin was associated with a statistically significant lower mortality (pooled OR = 0.62, 95% CI, 0.50–0.76, p = 0.000) and poor composite outcomes (pooled OR = 0.83, 95% CI, 0.71–0.97, p = 0.022) in diabetic patients with COVID-19. Significance of slight lower mortality remained in sulfonylurea/glinides (pooled OR = 0.93, 95% CI, 0.89–0.98, p = 0.004), but of poor composite outcomes was not (pooled OR = 1.48, 95% CI, 0.61–3.60, p = 0.384). Dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP-4 inhibitors) were associated with statistically non-significant lower mortality (pooled OR = 0.95, 95% CI, 0.72–1.26, p = 0.739) or poor composite outcomes (pooled OR = 1.27, 95% CI, 0.91–1.77, p = 0.162) of COVID-19 in diabetic patients. Conclusion Metformin might be beneficial in decreasing mortality and poor composite outcomes in diabetic patients infected with SARS-CoV-2. DPP-4 inhibitors, sulfonylurea/glinides, SGLT-2 inhibitors, and GLP-1RA wouldn't seem to be adverse. There's insufficient evidence to conclude effects of other anti-diabetic agents. Limited by retrospective characteristics, with relative weak capability to verify causality, more prospective studies, especially RCTs are needed. Registration number: PROSPERO-CRD42020221951.

Introduction: The highly infectious coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has now rapidly spread around the world. This meta-analysis was strictly focused on the influence of smoking history on the severe and critical outcomes on people with COVID-19 pneumonia. Methods: A systematic literature search was conducted in eight online databases before 1 February 2021. All studies meeting our selection criteria were included and evaluated. Stata 14.0 software was used to analyze the data. Results: A total of 109 articles involving 517,020 patients were included in this meta-analysis. A statistically significant association was discovered between smoking history and COVID-19 severity, the pooled OR was 1.55 (95%CI: 1.41-1.71). Smoking was significantly associated with the risk of admission to intensive care unit (ICU) (OR=1.73, 95%CI: 1.36-2.19), increased mortality (OR=1.58, 95%CI: 1.38-1.81), and critical diseases composite endpoints (OR=1.61, 95%CI: 1.35-1.93), whereas there was no relationship with mechanical ventilation. The pooled prevalence of smoking using the random effects model (REM) was 15% (95%CI: 14%-16%). Meta-regression analysis showed that age ( P= 0.004), hypertension ( P =0.007), diabetes ( P =0.029), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) ( P =0.001) were covariates that affect the association. Conclusions: Smoking was associated with severe or critical outcomes and increased the risk of admission to ICU and mortality in COVID-19 patients, but not associated with mechanical ventilation. This association was more significant for former smokers than in current smokers. Current smokers also had a higher risk of developing severe COVID-19 compared with non-smokers. More detailed data, which are representative for more counties, are needed to confirm these preliminary findings.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Objective There are an increasing number of studies that discussed suicide ideation (SI), suicide plan (SP), and suicide attempt (SA) among left‐behind children (LBC). However, the prevalence of these indicators of LBC has not been synthesized and the true correlation between these indicators and left‐behind status remains unclear. Methods Electronic databases were comprehensively searched, and eligible observational studies were selected to extract useful data. We pooled the rates and their 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) to determine the prevalence of SI, SP, and SA among LBC. The odds ratios (ORs) and 95% CIs were calculated to reflect the association between left‐behind status and risk of SI, SP, and SA. Results Among LBC, the pooled prevalence was 18.7% (95% CI: 15.4–21.9) for SI, 6.4% (95% CI: 4.7–8.1) for SP, and 3.1% (95% CI: 2.6–3.6) for SA. Compared to non‐LBC, LBC was at higher risk of SI (OR = 1.26), SP (OR = 1.20), and SA (OR = 1.14), but only the effect for SI achieved statistical significance. Conclusion Overall, the prevalence of SI, SP, and SA is common among LBC, and parental migration has a significant impact on the SI of LBC. Intervention plans and programs are urgently needed to prevent suicidality of this vulnerable group.

No abstract

No abstract