Prevalence of metabolic syndrome in Bangladesh: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the studies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Metabolic syndrome (MS) is a cluster of health problems that set the stage for serious health conditions and places individuals at higher risk of cardiovascular disease, diabetes and stroke. The worldwide prevalence of MS in the adult population is on the rise and Bangladesh is no exception. According to some epidemiological study, MS is highly prevalent in Bangladesh and has increased dramatically in last few decades. To provide a clear picture of the current situation, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis with an objective to assess the prevalence of metabolic syndrome among the Bangladeshi population using data already published in the scientific literature. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE and PubMed and manually checked references of all identified relevant publications that described the prevalence of MS in Bangladesh. Random effects meta-analysis was used to pool the prevalence. Heterogeneity was explored using formal tests and subgroup analyses. Study quality and publication bias was also explored. RESULTS: Electronic and grey literature search retrieved 491 potentially relevant papers. After removing duplicates, reviewing titles and abstracts and screening full texts, 10 studies were finally selected. Most of the studies were conducted in rural populations and study participants were mostly females. The weighted pooled prevalence of metabolic syndrome regardless of gender and criteria used to define metabolic syndrome, was 30.0% with high heterogeneity observed. Weighted pooled prevalence of metabolic syndrome is higher in females (32%) compared to males (25%) though not statistically significant (p = 0.434). Prevalence was highest (37%) when Modified NCEP ATP III criteria was used to define MS, while it was lowest (20%) when WHO criteria was used. In most cases, geographical area (urban/rural) was identified as a source of heterogeneity between the studies. Most of the studies met study quality assessment criteria's except adequate sample size criteria and evidence of small study effect was also detected. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of metabolic syndrome is high and rising in Bangladesh. Strategies aimed at primary prevention are required to mitigate a further increase in the prevalence and for the reduction of the morbidity and mortality associated with metabolic syndrome.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.012 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.024 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".