A meta-analysis: association between Beta-2 adrenergic receptor Arg16Gly polymorphism and asthma in China

Abstract

were searched using terms: ("asthma" or "asthmatic") and ("beta-2 adrenergic receptor" or "ADRB2" or "b2-AR") and "polymorphism" and ("Chinese" or "China"). The search had no restriction in language or publication status.Inclusion standards: (1) studies examining the relationship between ADRB2 Arg16Gly polymorphism and asthma, (2) study design with the case-control, (3) sufficient data of genotype frequency, (3) Chinese individuals. Exclusion standards: (1) overlapped literatures, (2) unextractable data, (3) not a case-control design, (4) abstract or reviews. The potentially relevant studies and extracted data from the identified publications, including first author's name, publication year, geographic areas, age group, sample size, and available genotype information from ADRB2 Arg16Gly polymorphism were screened by the investigators. Statistical analysisData were analyzed by STATA version 12 (StataCorp LP, College Station, TX, USA). Odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated and analyzed by Z-test. The model of G versus A, GG versus AA, GG versus (AA+AG) and (GG+AG) versus AA were examined with the asthma risk, respectively. Heterogeneity and Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium (HWE) were evaluated by I-squared based on Q and the df. When P heterogeneity < 0.1 or I 2 > 50%, a random-effects meta-analysis model was performed to estimate the pooled ORs; if not, a fixed-effects model was used. Pooled ORs were collected for the sensitivity assay. A p-value < 0.05 showed the significant change.

Effects of hairy vetch cultivation on soil quality and productivity in Chinese orchards: a meta-analysis

“…In this study, Excel software was used to classify the valid data from the papers. If the standard deviation SD in the paper was missing, 1/10 of the value of the experimental group and the control group were taken as the standard deviation according to the Andreas Gattingera method (Yan et al, 2021;Feng et al, 2021). If the 95% confidence interval (CI) of a set of data does not coincide with the 0 line, it is considered that the treatment has a significant effect on the target variable; if the interval is on the left side of the 0 line, there is a negative effect; if the interval is on the right side of the 0 line, there is a positive effect (Cai et al, 2020;Saigre-Tardif et al, 2022).…”