Multilevel resilience resources and cardiovascular disease in the United States: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Multilevel resilience resources and cardiovascular disease in the United States: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1037/hea0001069
复制
发表时间：
2022-04
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Howe CJ
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Park JW;Mealy R;Saldanha IJ;Loucks EB;Needham BL;Sims M;Fava JL;Dulin AJ;Howe CJ
本系统综述和荟萃分析旨在量化美国成年人在个体（如乐观）、人际（如社会支持）和社区（如社会环境）水平上的弹性资源与心血管结局之间的关系。2020年9月25日，系统检索了电子数据库（PubMed、Embase、CINAHL、PsycINFO），检索了随机对照试验、非随机干预研究和前瞻性队列研究，这些研究考察了个体、人际或社区水平的弹性资源与心血管结局之间的关系。对符合资格标准的研究进行叙述和定量总结。由于相关搜索结果仅产生观察性研究，因此使用非随机干预研究中偏倚风险（ROBINS-I）工具的改编版本来评估偏倚风险。从4103份独特的记录中，13项前瞻性队列研究（共310,906名参与者）符合资格标准，其中6项研究被纳入meta分析。大多数相关研究发现，较高水平的个人恢复力资源与较低的心血管不良结局发生率相关，其点估计值范围为0.46至1.18。人际层面的弹性资源（即社会网络）与较低的冠心病风险相关（风险比，0.76;95% CI, 0.56-1.02）。社区水平的恢复力资源（即感知到的社会凝聚力和居住稳定性）与较低的中风几率相关（优势比0.92;95% CI, 0.84-1.01）。有证据表明，高水平的恢复力资源与更好的心血管结果相关。然而，需要更多不同人群的前瞻性研究来加强证据。
This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to quantify the relationship between resilience resources at the individual (e.g., optimism), interpersonal (e.g., social support), and neighborhood (e.g., social environment) levels, and cardiovascular outcomes among adults in the United States. On 9/25/2020, electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO) were systematically searched for randomized controlled trials, non-randomized intervention studies, and prospective cohort studies that examined the relationship between resilience resources at the individual, interpersonal, or neighborhood level and cardiovascular outcomes. Studies that met the eligibility criteria were summarized narratively and quantitatively. Because relevant search results yielded only observational studies, risk of bias was assessed using an adapted version of the Risk of Bias in Non-randomized Studies of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tool. From 4,103 unique records, 13 prospective cohort studies with a total of 310,906 participants met the eligibility criteria, and 6 of these studies were included in the meta-analyses. Most relevant studies found that higher levels of individual-level resilience resources were associated with lower incidence of adverse cardiovascular outcomes, with point estimates ranging from 0.46 to 1.18. Interpersonal-level resilience resources (i.e., social network) were associated with a lower coronary heart disease risk (risk ratio, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.56–1.02). Neighborhood-level resilience resources (i.e., perceived social cohesion and residential stability) were associated with a lower odds of stroke (odds ratio, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.84–1.01). Evidence suggests that higher levels of resilience resources are associated with better cardiovascular outcomes. However, more prospective studies with diverse populations are needed to strengthen the evidence.
登录
查看更多内容
DOI：
10.1080/10911359.2014.988320
发表时间：
2015-08-18
影响因子：
1.6
作者：
Distelberg, Brian J.;Martin, A'verria Sirkin;Oloo, Winetta A.
通讯作者：
Oloo, Winetta A.
影响因子：
0.4
作者：
Gheshlagh, Reza Ghanei;Sayehmiri, Kourosh;Tabrizi, Kian Nourozi
通讯作者：
Tabrizi, Kian Nourozi
影响因子：
5
作者：
Eng, PM;Rimm, EB;Kawachi, I
通讯作者：
Kawachi, I
影响因子：
3.7
作者：
Clark CR;Ommerborn MJ;Hickson DA;Grooms KN;Sims M;Taylor HA;Albert MA
通讯作者：
Albert MA
影响因子：
4.6
作者：
Fletcher, David;Sarkar, Mustafa
通讯作者：
Sarkar, Mustafa