MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389900013 · doi:10.1111/obr.13661

Determinants of multimorbidity in low‐ and middle‐income countries: A systematic review of longitudinal studies and discovery of evidence gaps

2023· review· en· W4389900013 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Michelle M. C. Tan, Matheus Ghossain Barbosa, P. Pinho, Esubalew Assefa, Ana Ágata Mezzomo Keinert, Charlotte Hanlon, Barbara Barrett, Alex Dregan, Tin Tin Su, Devi Mohan, Cleusa P. Ferri, Graciela Muñiz‐Terrera, Matthew Prina

Bibliographic record

VenueObesity Reviews · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChronic Disease Management Strategies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMedical Research CouncilMonash UniversityKing's College LondonUK Research and Innovation
KeywordsMEDLINEMedicineSystematic reviewPopulationNon-communicable diseaseData extractionMultimorbidityGrey literatureCohort studyGerontologyGlobal healthEnvironmental healthFamily medicineDiseasePublic healthPathologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Multimorbidity-the coexistence of at least two chronic health conditions within the same individual-is an important global health challenge. In high-income countries (HICs), multimorbidity is dominated by non-communicable diseases (NCDs); whereas, the situation may be different in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), where chronic communicable diseases remain prominent. The aim of this systematic review was to identify determinants (including risk and protective factors) and potential mechanisms underlying multimorbidity from published longitudinal studies across diverse population-based or community-dwelling populations in LMICs. We systematically searched three electronic databases (Medline, Embase, and Global Health) using pre-defined search terms and selection criteria, complemented by hand-searching. All titles, abstracts, and full texts were independently screened by two reviewers from a pool of four researchers. Data extraction and reporting were according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Methodological quality and risk of bias assessment was performed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for cohort studies. Data were summarized using narrative synthesis. The search yielded 1782 records. Of the 52 full-text articles included for review, 8 longitudinal population-based studies were included for final data synthesis. Almost all studies were conducted in Asia, with only one from South America and none from Africa. All studies were published in the last decade, with half published in the year 2021. The definitions used for multimorbidity were heterogeneous, including 3-16 chronic conditions per study. The leading chronic conditions were heart disease, stroke, and diabetes, and there was a lack of consideration of mental health conditions (MHCs), infectious diseases, and undernutrition. Prospectively evaluated determinants included socio-economic status, markers of social inequities, childhood adversity, lifestyle behaviors, obesity, dyslipidemia, and disability. This review revealed a paucity of evidence from LMICs and a geographical bias in the distribution of multimorbidity research. Longitudinal research into epidemiological aspects of multimorbidity is warranted to build up scientific evidence in regions beyond Asia. Such evidence can provide a detailed picture of disease development, with important implications for community, clinical, and interventions in LMICs. The heterogeneity in study designs, exposures, outcomes, and statistical methods observed in the present review calls for greater methodological standardisation while conducting epidemiological studies on multimorbidity. The limited evidence for MHCs, infectious diseases, and undernutrition as components of multimorbidity calls for a more comprehensive definition of multimorbidity globally.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0110.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.314
GPT teacher head0.457
Teacher spread0.144 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations29
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueObesity ReviewsSame topicChronic Disease Management StrategiesFrench-language works237,207