Table ST1. Search strategy PubMed...Table ST1. Search strategy PubMed 1 (((Depress* OR Clinical depression OR Mood disorder OR Major depressive episode OR Dysthymi* OR Affective disorder
Post on 22-Feb-2020
9 Views
Preview:
Transcript
Table ST1. Search strategy
PubMed
1 (((Depress* OR Clinical depression OR Mood disorder OR Major depressive episode OR Dysthymi* OR Affective disorder OR
Anxiety OR Generalised Anxiety Disorder OR GAD OR Phobia OR Panic disorder OR Panic attack OR Agoraphobia OR Social
anxiety disorder OR Obsessive compulsive disorder OR Obsessive-compulsive disorder OR OCD OR PTSD OR Post traumatic
stress disorder OR Post-traumatic stress disorder OR Alprazolam OR Benzodiazepines OR Anthramycin OR Bromazepam OR
Clonazepam OR Devazepide OR Diazepam OR Flumazenil OR Flunitrazepam OR Flurazepam OR Lorazepam OR Nitrazepam OR
Oxazepam OR Pirenzepine OR Prazepam OR Temazepam OR Chlordiazepoxide OR Clorazepate OR Dipotassium OR Estazolam
OR Medazepam OR Midazolam OR Triazolam OR Psychotropic Drugs OR Antidepressive Agents OR Antidepressive Agents
(Second-Generation) OR Antidepressive Agents (Tricyclic) OR Hallucinogens OR Tranquilizing Agents OR Anti-Anxiety Agents
OR Antimanic Agents OR Antipsychotic Agents))) AND ((Cognit* OR Memory OR Attention OR Reaction time OR Speed of
processing OR processing speed OR Crystallized ability OR Crystallized intelligence OR Fluid ability OR Fluid intelligence OR
General mental ability OR GMA OR Intelligence OR Executive function OR Neuropsychological testing OR Mini mental stat*
exam* OR MMSE OR Dementia OR Alzheimer* OR Mild cognitive impairment OR MCI )) AND (Humans[Mesh])
Ovid PsycINFO
1 (Depress* or Clinical depression or Mood disorder or Major depressive episode or Dysthymi* or Affective disorder or Anxiety or
Generalised Anxiety Disorder or GAD or Phobia or Panic disorder or Panic attack or Agoraphobia or Social anxiety disorder or
Obsessive compulsive disorder or OCD or PTSD or Post traumatic stress disorder or Alprazolam or Benzodiazepines or
Anthramycin or Bromazepam or Clonazepam or Devazepide or Diazepam or Flumazenil or Flunitrazepam or Flurazepam or
Lorazepam or Nitrazepam or Oxazepam or Pirenzepine or Prazepam or Temazepam or Chlordiazepoxide or Clorazepate or
Dipotassium or Estazolam or Medazepam or Midazolam or Triazolam or Psychotropic Drugs or Antidepressive Agents or
Antidepressive Agents Second generation or Antidepressive Agents Tricyclic or Hallucinogens or Tranquilizing Agents or Anti
Anxiety Agents or Antimanic Agents or Antipsychotic Agents).mp. [mp=title, abstract, heading word, table of contents, key
concepts, original title, tests & measures]
2 (Cognit* or Memory or Attention or Reaction time or Speed of processing or processing speed or Crystallized ability or Crystallized
intelligence or Fluid ability or Fluid intelligence or General mental ability or GMA or Intelligence or Executive function or
Neuropsychological testing or Mini mental stat* exam* or MMSE or Dementia or Alzheimer* or Mild cognitive impairment or
MCI).mp. [mp=title, abstract, heading word, table of contents, key concepts, original title, tests & measures]
3 1 and 2
4 limit 3 to (human and English language)
Cochrane library
1 'Depress* OR Clinical depression OR Mood disorder OR Major depressive episode OR Dysthymi* OR Affective disorder OR
Anxiety OR Generalised Anxiety Disorder OR GAD OR Phobia OR Panic disorder OR Panic attack OR Agoraphobia OR Social
anxiety disorder OR Obsessive compulsive disorder OR Obsessive-compulsive disorder OR OCD OR PTSD OR Post traumatic
stress disorder OR Post-traumatic stress disorder OR Alprazolam OR Benzodiazepines OR Anthramycin OR Bromazepam OR
Clonazepam OR Devazepide OR Diazepam OR Flumazenil OR Flunitrazepam OR Flurazepam OR Lorazepam OR Nitrazepam OR
Oxazepam OR Pirenzepine OR Prazepam OR Temazepam OR Chlordiazepoxide OR Clorazepate OR Dipotassium OR Estazolam
OR Medazepam OR Midazolam OR Triazolam OR Psychotropic Drugs OR Antidepressive Agents OR Antidepressive Agents
(Second generation) OR Antidepressive Agents (Tricyclic) OR Hallucinogens OR Tranquilizing Agents OR Anti-Anxiety Agents
OR Antimanic Agents OR Antipsychotic Agents and Cognit* OR Memory OR Attention OR Reaction time OR Speed of processing
OR processing speed OR Crystallized ability OR Crystallized intelligence OR Fluid ability OR Fluid intelligence OR General mental
ability OR GMA OR Intelligence OR Executive function OR Neuropsychological testing OR Mini mental stat* exam* OR MMSE
OR Dementia OR Alzheimer* OR Mild cognitive impairment OR MCI
Table ST2. Quality rating of studies selected for inclusion based on the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale.
Quality Indicators From the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale
Studies 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Barnes et al.,
2012
Yes yes yes yes no yes yes yes yes
Becker et al.,
2009
yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes
Blasko et al.,
2010
yes yes yes yes no yes yes yes yes
Chen et al.,
1999
yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes
Chen et al., 2008
(China)
no yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes
Chen et al., 2008
(UK)
yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes
Dal Forno et al.,
2005
yes yes yes yes no yes yes yes no
Devanand et al.,
1996
no yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes
Dotson et al.,
2010
yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes no
Fuhrer et al.,
2003
yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes
Gatz et al.,
2005
yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes
Geerlings et al.,
2008
yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes no
Geerlings et al.,
2000
yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes
Goveas et al.,
2011
no yes yes yes no yes yes yes yes
Heser et al.,
2013
yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes
Heun et al., yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes
2006
Irie et al.,
2008
no yes yes yes no yes yes yes yes
Jessen et al.,
2010
yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes
Jessen et al.,
2011
yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes
Jungwirth et al.,
2009
yes yes yes yes no no yes yes yes
Kim et al.,
2010
yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes
Kim et al.,
2011
yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes
Kohler et al.,
2011
yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes
Lenoir et al.,
2011
yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes
Li et al.,
2011
yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes
Luchsinger et al.,
2008
yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes no
Luppa et al.,
2013
yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes
Palmer et al.,
2007
yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes
Palsson et al.,
1999
yes yes yes yes no no yes yes yes
Saczynski et al.,
2010
yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes no
Samieri et al.,
2008
yes yes yes yes no yes yes yes yes
Schmand et al.,
1997
yes yes yes yes no no yes yes yes
St John et al.,
2002
yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes
Van der Kommer
et al., 2010
yes yes yes yes no no yes yes yes
Vilalta-Franch et
al., 2012
yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes
Wilson et al.,
2003
yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes
Wilson et al.,
2011
yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes
1. Cohort truly representative of the population 2. Non-exposed participants from same community as exposed participants 3. Ascertainment of
exposure 4. Dementia not present at baseline 5. Study controls for age and sex 6. Study controls for other factors 7. Quality of outcome
assessment 8. Follow-up long enough for dementia to occur 9. Complete follow-up (all participants are accounted for)
Analyses:
AD continuous (all compatible)
Random-Effects Model (k = 10; tau^2 estimator: DL)
logLik deviance AIC BIC AICc
8.1673 22.1823 -12.3346 -11.7294 -10.6203
tau^2 (estimated amount of total heterogeneity): 0.0015 (SE = 0.0014)
tau (square root of estimated tau^2 value): 0.0391
I^2 (total heterogeneity / total variability): 62.06%
H^2 (total variability / sampling variability): 2.64
Test for Heterogeneity:
Q(df = 9) = 23.7240, p-val = 0.0048
Model Results:
estimate se zval pval ci.lb ci.ub
0.0536 0.0190 2.8217 0.0048 0.0164 0.0908 **
---
Signif. codes: 0 ‘***’ 0.001 ‘**’ 0.01 ‘*’ 0.05 ‘.’ 0.1 ‘ ’ 1
Leave one out sensitivity analysis estimate se zval pval ci.lb ci.ub Q Qp tau2 I2 H2
1 0.0492 0.0189 2.5979 0.0094 0.0121 0.0863 21.8313 0.0052 0.0015 63.3553 2.7289
2 0.054 0.0194 2.7833 0.0054 0.016 0.0919 23.53 0.0027 0.0016 66.0008 2.9412
3 0.0586 0.024 2.437 0.0148 0.0115 0.1057 22.1508 0.0046 0.0022 63.8839 2.7688
4 0.0623 0.0165 3.7839 0.0002 0.0301 0.0946 13.2307 0.1042 0.0007 39.5346 1.6538
5 0.0619 0.0235 2.6365 0.0084 0.0159 0.108 23.7195 0.0026 0.0021 66.2725 2.9649
6 0.0601 0.0226 2.6605 0.0078 0.0158 0.1044 23.7212 0.0026 0.0019 66.2749 2.9651
7 0.0486 0.0184 2.6442 0.0082 0.0126 0.0847 21.0271 0.0071 0.0014 61.9539 2.6284
8 0.0438 0.0166 2.6455 0.0082 0.0114 0.0763 17.505 0.0253 0.001 54.2989 2.1881
9 0.0484 0.0182 2.6532 0.008 0.0126 0.0841 20.7307 0.0079 0.0013 61.4098 2.5913
10 0.061 0.0241 2.5344 0.0113 0.0138 0.1081 23.4956 0.0028 0.0022 65.951 2.9369
Fail-safe N Calculation Using the Rosenthal Approach
Fail-safe N Calculation Using the Rosenthal Approach
Observed Significance Level: <.0001
Target Significance Level: 0.05
Fail-safe N: 101
Trim-and-fill analysis
Estimated number of missing studies on the left side: 5 (SE = 1.9266)
Random-Effects Model (k = 15; tau^2 estimator: DL)
tau^2 (estimated amount of total heterogeneity): 0.0025 (SE = 0.0021)
tau (square root of estimated tau^2 value): 0.0501
I^2 (total heterogeneity / total variability): 64.10%
H^2 (total variability / sampling variability): 2.79
Test for Heterogeneity:
Q(df = 14) = 38.9936, p-val = 0.0004
Model Results:
estimate se zval pval ci.lb ci.ub
0.0334 0.0215 1.5493 0.1213 -0.0088 0.0756
---
Signif. codes: 0 ‘***’ 0.001 ‘**’ 0.01 ‘*’ 0.05 ‘.’ 0.1 ‘ ’ 1
AD continuous (CES-D/HAM)
Random-Effects Model (k = 7; tau^2 estimator: DL)
logLik deviance AIC BIC AICc
3.5299 15.2687 -3.0598 -3.4762 0.9402
tau^2 (estimated amount of total heterogeneity): 0.0025 (SE = 0.0029)
tau (square root of estimated tau^2 value): 0.0505
I^2 (total heterogeneity / total variability): 72.87%
H^2 (total variability / sampling variability): 3.69
Test for Heterogeneity:
Q(df = 5) = 18.4272, p-val = 0.0025
Model Results:
estimate se zval pval ci.lb ci.ub
0.0538 0.0297 1.8108 0.0702 -0.0044 0.1121 .
---
Signif. codes: 0 ‘***’ 0.001 ‘**’ 0.01 ‘*’ 0.05 ‘.’ 0.1 ‘ ’ 1
Leave one out sensitivity analysis
estimate se zval pval ci.lb ci.ub Q Qp tau2 I2 H2
1 0.0661 0.0314 2.1066 0.0352 0.0046 0.1275 21.3265 0.0007 0.0031 76.555 4.2653
2 0.0928 0.0462 2.0118 0.0442 0.0024 0.1833 18.5071 0.0024 0.0056 72.9833 3.7014
3 0.0911 0.0325 2.8064 0.005 0.0275 0.1548 11.1795 0.0479 0.0022 55.2754 2.2359
4 0.0977 0.0453 2.1576 0.031 0.009 0.1865 21.5077 0.0006 0.0054 76.7525 4.3015
5 0.0544 0.03 1.8121 0.07 -
0.0044
0.1133 18.7243 0.0022 0.0026 73.2967 3.7449
6 0.044 0.0269 1.6383 0.1014 -
0.0086
0.0966 15.1112 0.0099 0.0019 66.9119 3.0222
7 0.0538 0.0297 1.8108 0.0702 -
0.0044
0.1121 18.4272 0.0025 0.0025 72.8661 3.6854
Fail-safe N Calculation Using the Rosenthal Approach
Observed Significance Level: <.0001
Target Significance Level: 0.05
Fail-safe N: 43
Trim-and-fill analysis
Estimated number of missing studies on the left side: 3 (SE = 1.6850)
Random-Effects Model (k = 10; tau^2 estimator: DL)
tau^2 (estimated amount of total heterogeneity): 0.0047 (SE = 0.0048)
tau (square root of estimated tau^2 value): 0.0686
I^2 (total heterogeneity / total variability): 74.45%
H^2 (total variability / sampling variability): 3.91
Test for Heterogeneity:
Q(df = 9) = 35.2272, p-val < .0001
Model Results:
estimate se zval pval ci.lb ci.ub
0.0276 0.0339 0.8125 0.4165 -0.0389 0.0940
---
Signif. codes: 0 ‘***’ 0.001 ‘**’ 0.01 ‘*’ 0.05 ‘.’ 0.1 ‘ ’ 1
AD Clinical Threshold (All compatible)
Random-Effects Model (k = 10; tau^2 estimator: DL)
logLik deviance AIC BIC AICc
-8.5049 16.0360 21.0097 21.6149 22.7240
tau^2 (estimated amount of total heterogeneity): 0.1929 (SE = 0.1725)
tau (square root of estimated tau^2 value): 0.4392
I^2 (total heterogeneity / total variability): 54.92%
H^2 (total variability / sampling variability): 2.22
Test for Heterogeneity:
Q(df = 9) = 19.9626, p-val = 0.0181
Model Results:
estimate se zval pval ci.lb ci.ub
0.7138 0.1924 3.7096 0.0002 0.3367 1.0910 ***
---
Signif. codes: 0 ‘***’ 0.001 ‘**’ 0.01 ‘*’ 0.05 ‘.’ 0.1 ‘ ’ 1
Leave one out sensitivity analysis estimate se zval pval ci.lb ci.ub Q Qp tau2 I2 H2
1 0.0492 0.0189 2.5979 0.0094 0.0121 0.0863 21.8313 0.0052 0.0015 63.3553 2.7289
2 0.054 0.0194 2.7833 0.0054 0.016 0.0919 23.53 0.0027 0.0016 66.0008 2.9412
3 0.0586 0.024 2.437 0.0148 0.0115 0.1057 22.1508 0.0046 0.0022 63.8839 2.7688
4 0.0623 0.0165 3.7839 0.0002 0.0301 0.0946 13.2307 0.1042 0.0007 39.5346 1.6538
5 0.0619 0.0235 2.6365 0.0084 0.0159 0.108 23.7195 0.0026 0.0021 66.2725 2.9649
6 0.0601 0.0226 2.6605 0.0078 0.0158 0.1044 23.7212 0.0026 0.0019 66.2749 2.9651
7 0.0486 0.0184 2.6442 0.0082 0.0126 0.0847 21.0271 0.0071 0.0014 61.9539 2.6284
8 0.0438 0.0166 2.6455 0.0082 0.0114 0.0763 17.505 0.0253 0.001 54.2989 2.1881
9 0.0484 0.0182 2.6532 0.008 0.0126 0.0841 20.7307 0.0079 0.0013 61.4098 2.5913
10 0.061 0.0241 2.5344 0.0113 0.0138 0.1081 23.4956 0.0028 0.0022 65.951 2.9369
Fail-safe N Calculation Using the Rosenthal Approach
Observed Significance Level: <.0001
Target Significance Level: 0.05
Fail-safe N: 102
Trim-and-fill analysis
Estimated number of missing studies on the left side: 3 (SE = 2.1498)
Random-Effects Model (k = 13; tau^2 estimator: DL)
tau^2 (estimated amount of total heterogeneity): 0.2369 (SE = 0.1753)
tau (square root of estimated tau^2 value): 0.4867
I^2 (total heterogeneity / total variability): 58.01%
H^2 (total variability / sampling variability): 2.38
Test for Heterogeneity:
Q(df = 12) = 28.5795, p-val = 0.0045
Model Results:
estimate se zval pval ci.lb ci.ub
0.5181 0.1823 2.8415 0.0045 0.1607 0.8755 **
---
Signif. codes: 0 ‘***’ 0.001 ‘**’ 0.01 ‘*’ 0.05 ‘.’ 0.1 ‘ ’
AD Clinical Threshold (CES-D > 20)
Random-Effects Model (k = 5; tau^2 estimator: DL) logLik deviance AIC BIC AICc
-5.3513 9.5265 14.7026 13.9215 20.7026
tau^2 (estimated amount of total heterogeneity): 0.4698 (SE = 0.4821)
tau (square root of estimated tau^2 value): 0.6854
I^2 (total heterogeneity / total variability): 70.96%
H^2 (total variability / sampling variability): 3.44
Test for Heterogeneity:
Q(df = 4) = 13.7733, p-val = 0.0081
Model Results:
estimate se zval pval ci.lb ci.ub
0.6757 0.3682 1.8351 0.0665 -0.0460 1.3973 .
---
Signif. codes: 0 ‘***’ 0.001 ‘**’ 0.01 ‘*’ 0.05 ‘.’ 0.1 ‘ ’ 1
Leave one out sensitivity analysis
estimate se zval pval ci.lb ci.ub Q Qp tau2 I2 H2
1 0.6953 0.4513 1.5407 0.1234 -0.1892 1.5798 13.7733 0.0032 0.6264 78.2188 4.5911
2 0.6327 0.4892 1.2933 0.1959 -0.3262 1.5915 13.1567 0.0043 0.726 77.1979 4.3856
3 0.4993 0.414 1.2061 0.2278 -0.3121 1.3107 9.6725 0.0216 0.4626 68.9843 3.2242
4 1.0257 0.225 4.5583 0 0.5847 1.4667 1.3841 0.7093 0 0 1
5 0.5639 0.4242 1.3295 0.1837 -0.2674 1.3952 12.527 0.0058 0.5404 76.0517 4.1757
Fail-safe N Calculation Using the Rosenthal Approach
Observed Significance Level: 0.0004
Target Significance Level: 0.05
Fail-safe N: 16
Trim-and-fill analysis
Estimated number of missing studies on the left side: 1 (SE = 1.7009)
Random-Effects Model (k = 6; tau^2 estimator: DL)
tau^2 (estimated amount of total heterogeneity): 0.4876 (SE = 0.4359)
tau (square root of estimated tau^2 value): 0.6983
I^2 (total heterogeneity / total variability): 72.65%
H^2 (total variability / sampling variability): 3.66
Test for Heterogeneity:
Q(df = 5) = 18.2798, p-val = 0.0026
Model Results:
estimate se zval pval ci.lb ci.ub
0.5005 0.3382 1.4801 0.1389 -0.1623 1.1633
---
Signif. codes: 0 ‘***’ 0.001 ‘**’ 0.01 ‘*’ 0.05 ‘.’ 0.1 ‘ ’ 1
AD Clinical Threshold (CES-D > 16)
Random-Effects Model (k = 6; tau^2 estimator: DL) logLik deviance AIC BIC AICc
-0.8119 2.5581 5.6239 5.2074 9.6239
tau^2 (estimated amount of total heterogeneity): 0 (SE = 0.0724)
tau (square root of estimated tau^2 value): 0
I^2 (total heterogeneity / total variability): 0.00%
H^2 (total variability / sampling variability): 1.00
Test for Heterogeneity:
Q(df = 5) = 2.5581, p-val = 0.7677
Model Results:
estimate se zval pval ci.lb ci.ub
0.4585 0.1189 3.8561 0.0001 0.2255 0.6916 ***
---
Signif. codes: 0 ‘***’ 0.001 ‘**’ 0.01 ‘*’ 0.05 ‘.’ 0.1 ‘ ’ 1
Leave one out sensitivity analysis estimate se zval pval ci.lb ci.ub Q Qp tau2 I2 H2
1 0.5958 0.1827 3.2608 0.0011 0.2377 0.954 1.5787 0.8126 0 0 1
2 0.4684 0.1222 3.8315 0.0001 0.2288 0.708 2.4371 0.6559 0 0 1
3 0.4247 0.1225 3.4667 0.0005 0.1846 0.6648 1.2333 0.8726 0 0 1
4 0.4669 0.1221 3.8221 0.0001 0.2275 0.7063 2.469 0.6502 0 0 1
5 0.4335 0.1233 3.5142 0.0004 0.1917 0.6752 1.9731 0.7407 0 0 1
6 0.4337 0.132 3.2844 0.001 0.1749 0.6924 2.3703 0.668 0 0 1
Fail-safe N Calculation Using the Rosenthal Approach
Fail-safe N Calculation Using the Rosenthal Approach
Observed Significance Level: <.0001
Target Significance Level: 0.05
Fail-safe N: 26
Estimated number of missing studies on the left side: 0 (SE = 1.6829)
Estimated number of missing studies on the left side: 2 (SE = 1.7837)
Random-Effects Model (k = 8; tau^2 estimator: DL)
tau^2 (estimated amount of total heterogeneity): 0 (SE = 0.0676)
tau (square root of estimated tau^2 value): 0
I^2 (total heterogeneity / total variability): 0.00%
H^2 (total variability / sampling variability): 1.00
Test for Heterogeneity:
Q(df = 7) = 5.1651, p-val = 0.6398
Model Results:
estimate se zval pval ci.lb ci.ub
0.3952 0.1119 3.5302 0.0004 0.1758 0.6146 ***
---
Signif. codes: 0 ‘***’ 0.001 ‘**’ 0.01 ‘*’ 0.05 ‘.’ 0.1 ‘ ’ 1
Dementia continuous (all compatible)
Random-Effects Model (k = 10; tau^2 estimator: DL) logLik deviance AIC BIC AICc
7.1882 27.5279 -10.3764 -9.7712 -8.6621
tau^2 (estimated amount of total heterogeneity): 0.0008 (SE = 0.0007)
tau (square root of estimated tau^2 value): 0.0284
I^2 (total heterogeneity / total variability): 63.06%
H^2 (total variability / sampling variability): 2.71
Test for Heterogeneity:
Q(df = 9) = 24.3653, p-val = 0.0038
Model Results:
estimate se zval pval ci.lb ci.ub
0.0508 0.0135 3.7672 0.0002 0.0244 0.0772 ***
---
Signif. codes: 0 ‘***’ 0.001 ‘**’ 0.01 ‘*’ 0.05 ‘.’ 0.1 ‘ ’ 1
Leave one out sensitivity analysis estimate se zval pval ci.lb ci.ub Q Qp tau2 I2 H2
1 0.0492 0.0189 2.5979 0.0094 0.0121 0.0863 21.8313 0.0052 0.0015 63.3553 2.7289
2 0.054 0.0194 2.7833 0.0054 0.016 0.0919 23.53 0.0027 0.0016 66.0008 2.9412
3 0.0586 0.024 2.437 0.0148 0.0115 0.1057 22.1508 0.0046 0.0022 63.8839 2.7688
4 0.0623 0.0165 3.7839 0.0002 0.0301 0.0946 13.2307 0.1042 0.0007 39.5346 1.6538
5 0.0619 0.0235 2.6365 0.0084 0.0159 0.108 23.7195 0.0026 0.0021 66.2725 2.9649
6 0.0601 0.0226 2.6605 0.0078 0.0158 0.1044 23.7212 0.0026 0.0019 66.2749 2.9651
7 0.0486 0.0184 2.6442 0.0082 0.0126 0.0847 21.0271 0.0071 0.0014 61.9539 2.6284
8 0.0438 0.0166 2.6455 0.0082 0.0114 0.0763 17.505 0.0253 0.001 54.2989 2.1881
9 0.0484 0.0182 2.6532 0.008 0.0126 0.0841 20.7307 0.0079 0.0013 61.4098 2.5913
10 0.061 0.0241 2.5344 0.0113 0.0138 0.1081 23.4956 0.0028 0.0022 65.951 2.9369
Fail-safe N Calculation Using the Rosenthal Approach
Observed Significance Level: <.0001
Target Significance Level: 0.05
Fail-safe N: 121
Trim-and-fill analysis Estimated number of missing studies on the left side: 3 (SE = 2.3645)
Random-Effects Model (k = 15; tau^2 estimator: DL)
tau^2 (estimated amount of total heterogeneity): 0.0017 (SE = 0.0015)
tau (square root of estimated tau^2 value): 0.0409
I^2 (total heterogeneity / total variability): 59.23%
H^2 (total variability / sampling variability): 2.45
Test for Heterogeneity:
Q(df = 14) = 34.3394, p-val = 0.0018
Model Results:
estimate se zval pval ci.lb ci.ub
0.0606 0.0188 3.2296 0.0012 0.0238 0.0974 **
---
Signif. codes: 0 ‘***’ 0.001 ‘**’ 0.01 ‘*’ 0.05 ‘.’ 0.1 ‘ ’ 1
Dementia continuous (CES-D/HAM)
Random-Effects Model (k = 8; tau^2 estimator: DL) logLik deviance AIC BIC AICc
11.3939 17.6476 -18.7878 -18.6290 -16.3878
tau^2 (estimated amount of total heterogeneity): 0.0004 (SE = 0.0005)
tau (square root of estimated tau^2 value): 0.0211
I^2 (total heterogeneity / total variability): 54.82%
H^2 (total variability / sampling variability): 2.21
Test for Heterogeneity:
Q(df = 7) = 15.4937, p-val = 0.0302
Model Results:
estimate se zval pval ci.lb ci.ub
0.0457 0.0111 4.1261 <.0001 0.0240 0.0674 ***
---
Signif. codes: 0 ‘***’ 0.001 ‘**’ 0.01 ‘*’ 0.05 ‘.’ 0.1 ‘ ’ 1
Leave one out sensitivity analysis estimate se zval pval ci.lb ci.ub Q Qp tau2 I2 H2
1 0.0492 0.0189 2.5979 0.0094 0.0121 0.0863 21.8313 0.0052 0.0015 63.3553 2.7289
2 0.054 0.0194 2.7833 0.0054 0.016 0.0919 23.53 0.0027 0.0016 66.0008 2.9412
3 0.0586 0.024 2.437 0.0148 0.0115 0.1057 22.1508 0.0046 0.0022 63.8839 2.7688
4 0.0623 0.0165 3.7839 0.0002 0.0301 0.0946 13.2307 0.1042 0.0007 39.5346 1.6538
5 0.0619 0.0235 2.6365 0.0084 0.0159 0.108 23.7195 0.0026 0.0021 66.2725 2.9649
6 0.0601 0.0226 2.6605 0.0078 0.0158 0.1044 23.7212 0.0026 0.0019 66.2749 2.9651
7 0.0486 0.0184 2.6442 0.0082 0.0126 0.0847 21.0271 0.0071 0.0014 61.9539 2.6284
8 0.0438 0.0166 2.6455 0.0082 0.0114 0.0763 17.505 0.0253 0.001 54.2989 2.1881
9 0.0484 0.0182 2.6532 0.008 0.0126 0.0841 20.7307 0.0079 0.0013 61.4098 2.5913
10 0.061 0.0241 2.5344 0.0113 0.0138 0.1081 23.4956 0.0028 0.0022 65.951 2.9369
Fail-safe N Calculation Using the Rosenthal Approach
Observed Significance Level: <.0001
Target Significance Level: 0.05
Fail-safe N: 131
Trim-and-fill analysis Estimated number of missing studies on the left side: 3 (SE = 1.8667)
Random-Effects Model (k = 11; tau^2 estimator: DL)
tau^2 (estimated amount of total heterogeneity): 0.0009 (SE = 0.0007)
tau (square root of estimated tau^2 value): 0.0294
I^2 (total heterogeneity / total variability): 65.12%
H^2 (total variability / sampling variability): 2.87
Test for Heterogeneity:
Q(df = 10) = 28.6690, p-val = 0.0014
Model Results:
estimate se zval pval ci.lb ci.ub
0.0377 0.0129 2.9318 0.0034 0.0125 0.0629 **
---
Signif. codes: 0 ‘***’ 0.001 ‘**’ 0.01 ‘*’ 0.05 ‘.’ 0.1 ‘ ’ 1
Dementia categorical (All compatible)
Random-Effects Model (k = 9; tau^2 estimator: DL) logLik deviance AIC BIC AICc
-6.6395 14.0693 17.2790 18.0748 18.7790
tau^2 (estimated amount of total heterogeneity): 0.0844 (SE = 0.0998)
tau (square root of estimated tau^2 value): 0.2905
I^2 (total heterogeneity / total variability): 38.34%
H^2 (total variability / sampling variability): 1.62
Test for Heterogeneity:
Q(df = 10) = 16.2182, p-val = 0.0936
Model Results:
estimate se zval pval ci.lb ci.ub
0.6855 0.1441 4.7573 <.0001 0.4031 0.9679 ***
---
Signif. codes: 0 ‘***’ 0.001 ‘**’ 0.01 ‘*’ 0.05 ‘.’ 0.1 ‘ ’ 1
Leave one out sensitivity analysis estimate se zval pval ci.lb ci.ub Q Qp tau2 I2 H2
1 0.6725 0.157 4.2824 0 0.3647 0.9803 15.9913 0.0671 0.1034 43.7193 1.7768
2 0.704 0.155 4.5409 0 0.4001 1.0078 16.0193 0.0665 0.1014 43.8178 1.7799
3 0.6222 0.1476 4.2152 0 0.3329 0.9116 13.46 0.1429 0.0698 33.135 1.4956
4 0.8265 0.118 7.0026 0 0.5952 1.0579 2.8003 0.9717 0 0 1
5 0.666 0.1524 4.3692 0 0.3672 0.9648 15.7327 0.0727 0.0962 42.7944 1.7481
6 0.6865 0.1643 4.1774 0 0.3644 1.0087 16.1967 0.0629 0.1155 44.4332 1.7996
7 0.6745 0.165 4.0876 0 0.3511 0.9979 15.975 0.0674 0.115 43.662 1.775
8 0.6842 0.1607 4.2566 0 0.3691 0.9992 16.1867 0.0631 0.1098 44.3989 1.7985
9 0.6659 0.1531 4.3498 0 0.3658 0.9659 15.7466 0.0724 0.0969 42.8446 1.7496
10 0.7004 0.1565 4.4761 0 0.3937 1.0071 16.1187 0.0644 0.1039 44.1642 1.791
11 0.6627 0.1551 4.2715 0 0.3586 0.9668 15.6741 0.074 0.0984 42.5805 1.7416
Fail-safe N Calculation Using the Rosenthal Approach Observed Significance Level: <.0001
Target Significance Level: 0.05
Fail-safe N: 142
Trim-and-fill analysis Estimated number of missing studies on the left side: 4 (SE = 2.1937)
Random-Effects Model (k = 15; tau^2 estimator: DL)
tau^2 (estimated amount of total heterogeneity): 0.1145 (SE = 0.0999)
tau (square root of estimated tau^2 value): 0.3384
I^2 (total heterogeneity / total variability): 44.24%
H^2 (total variability / sampling variability): 1.79
Test for Heterogeneity:
Q(df = 14) = 25.1089, p-val = 0.0335
Model Results:
estimate se zval pval ci.lb ci.ub
0.5206 0.1344 3.8736 0.0001 0.2572 0.7840 ***
---
Signif. codes: 0 ‘***’ 0.001 ‘**’ 0.01 ‘*’ 0.05 ‘.’ 0.1 ‘ ’ 1
Dementia categorical (CES-D >20)
Random-Effects Model (k = 5; tau^2 estimator: DL) logLik deviance AIC BIC AICc
-4.6477 9.2448 13.2954 12.5143 19.2954
tau^2 (estimated amount of total heterogeneity): 0.3891 (SE = 0.3983)
tau (square root of estimated tau^2 value): 0.6238
I^2 (total heterogeneity / total variability): 71.85%
H^2 (total variability / sampling variability): 3.55
Test for Heterogeneity:
Q(df = 4) = 14.2079, p-val = 0.0067
Model Results:
estimate se zval pval ci.lb ci.ub
0.6033 0.3337 1.8080 0.0706 -0.0507 1.2574 .
---
Signif. codes: 0 ‘***’ 0.001 ‘**’ 0.01 ‘*’ 0.05 ‘.’ 0.1 ‘ ’ 1
Leave one out sensitivity analysis estimate se zval pval ci.lb ci.ub Q Qp tau2 I2 H2
1 0.5467 0.4162 1.3135 0.189 -
0.2691
1.3625 13.4257 0.0038 0.5237 77.6548 4.4752
2 0.6427 0.4113 1.5627 0.1181 -
0.1634
1.4487 14.1859 0.0027 0.5217 78.8523 4.7286
3 0.4305 0.3577 1.2035 0.2288 -
0.2706
1.1316 8.5327 0.0362 0.3257 64.8412 2.8442
4 0.9413 0.2066 4.5557 0 0.5363 1.3462 1.5507 0.6706 0 0 1
5 0.5201 0.3882 1.3399 0.1803 -
0.2407
1.2808 13.2095 0.0042 0.4585 77.289 4.4032
Fail-safe N Calculation Using the Rosenthal Approach Observed Significance Level: 0.0005
Target Significance Level: 0.05
Fail-safe N: 16
Trim-and-fill analysis Estimated number of missing studies on the left side: 1 (SE = 1.7009)
Random-Effects Model (k = 6; tau^2 estimator: DL)
tau^2 (estimated amount of total heterogeneity): 0.4046 (SE = 0.3582)
tau (square root of estimated tau^2 value): 0.6361
I^2 (total heterogeneity / total variability): 74.33%
H^2 (total variability / sampling variability): 3.90
Test for Heterogeneity:
Q(df = 5) = 19.4798, p-val = 0.0016
Model Results:
estimate se zval pval ci.lb ci.ub
0.4367 0.3056 1.4292 0.1529 -0.1622 1.0356
---
Signif. codes: 0 ‘***’ 0.001 ‘**’ 0.01 ‘*’ 0.05 ‘.’ 0.1 ‘ ’ 1
Dementia categorical (CES-D >16)
Random-Effects Model (k = 9; tau^2 estimator: DL)
logLik deviance AIC BIC AICc
1.7584 2.7745 0.4832 0.8776 2.4832
tau^2 (estimated amount of total heterogeneity): 0 (SE = 0.0322)
tau (square root of estimated tau^2 value): 0
I^2 (total heterogeneity / total variability): 0.00%
H^2 (total variability / sampling variability): 1.00
Test for Heterogeneity:
Q(df = 8) = 2.7745, p-val = 0.9477
Model Results:
estimate se zval pval ci.lb ci.ub
0.5268 0.0771 6.8328 <.0001 0.3757 0.6779 ***
---
Signif. codes: 0 ‘***’ 0.001 ‘**’ 0.01 ‘*’ 0.05 ‘.’ 0.1 ‘ ’ 1
Leave one out sensitivity analysis estimate se zval pval ci.lb ci.ub Q Qp tau2 I2 H2
1 0.5131 0.0823 6.2378 0 0.3519 0.6743 2.5459 0.9236 0 0 1
2 0.5157 0.0784 6.5817 0 0.3622 0.6693 2.1484 0.9512 0 0 1
3 0.5335 0.0782 6.8198 0 0.3801 0.6868 2.5213 0.9255 0 0 1
4 0.5131 0.08 6.4179 0 0.3564 0.6698 2.3577 0.9374 0 0 1
5 0.5299 0.0792 6.6914 0 0.3747 0.6852 2.7445 0.9076 0 0 1
6 0.5504 0.0805 6.8402 0 0.3927 0.7081 1.725 0.9735 0 0 1
7 0.5183 0.1058 4.8982 0 0.3109 0.7256 2.7606 0.9062 0 0 1
8 0.5253 0.0808 6.4972 0 0.3668 0.6837 2.7705 0.9054 0 0 1
9 0.5377 0.0793 6.7826 0 0.3824 0.6931 2.4244 0.9327 0 0 1
Fail-safe N Calculation Using the Rosenthal Approach Observed Significance Level: <.0001
Target Significance Level: 0.05
Fail-safe N: 114
Trim-and-fill analysis Estimated number of missing studies on the right side: 0 (SE = 2.0456)
Random-Effects Model (k = 9; tau^2 estimator: DL)
tau^2 (estimated amount of total heterogeneity): 0 (SE = 0.0322)
tau (square root of estimated tau^2 value): 0
I^2 (total heterogeneity / total variability): 0.00%
H^2 (total variability / sampling variability): 1.00
Test for Heterogeneity:
Q(df = 8) = 2.7745, p-val = 0.9477
Model Results:
estimate se zval pval ci.lb ci.ub
0.5268 0.0771 6.8328 <.0001 0.3757 0.6779 ***
---
Signif. codes: 0 ‘***’ 0.001 ‘**’ 0.01 ‘*’ 0.05 ‘.’ 0.1 ‘ ’ 1
VaD continuous (All)
Random-Effects Model (k = 3; tau^2 estimator: DL) logLik deviance AIC BIC AICc
1.3925 3.1371 1.2149 -0.5879 13.2149
tau^2 (estimated amount of total heterogeneity): 0.0027 (SE = 0.0124)
tau (square root of estimated tau^2 value): 0.0521
I^2 (total heterogeneity / total variability): 22.36%
H^2 (total variability / sampling variability): 1.29
Test for Heterogeneity:
Q(df = 2) = 2.5760, p-val = 0.2758
Model Results:
estimate se zval pval ci.lb ci.ub
0.0631 0.0544 1.1599 0.2461 -0.0435 0.1696
---
Signif. codes: 0 ‘***’ 0.001 ‘**’ 0.01 ‘*’ 0.05 ‘.’ 0.1 ‘ ’ 1
Leave one out sensitivity analysis estimate se zval pval ci.lb ci.ub Q Qp tau2 I2 H2
1 0.5017 0.4457 1.1258 0.2602 -
0.3717
1.3752 12.9869 0.0015 0.5039 84.5999 6.4934
2 0.4038 0.4305 0.938 0.3482 -0.44 1.2476 8.5973 0.0136 0.415 76.737 4.2987
3 0.9324 0.1994 4.6768 0 0.5417 1.3232 1.1598 0.56 0 0 1
4 0.5834 0.5536 1.0538 0.292 -
0.5017
1.6685 13.4257 0.0012 0.7673 85.1032 6.7129
Fail-safe N Calculation Using the Rosenthal Approach Fail-safe N Calculation Using the Rosenthal Approach
Observed Significance Level: 0.0003
Target Significance Level: 0.05
Fail-safe N: 14
Trim-and-fill analysis Estimated number of missing studies on the left side: 1 (SE = 1.6103)
Random-Effects Model (k = 5; tau^2 estimator: DL)
tau^2 (estimated amount of total heterogeneity): 0.4494 (SE = 0.4100)
tau (square root of estimated tau^2 value): 0.6704
I^2 (total heterogeneity / total variability): 80.15%
H^2 (total variability / sampling variability): 5.04
Test for Heterogeneity:
Q(df = 4) = 20.1561, p-val = 0.0005
Model Results:
estimate se zval pval ci.lb ci.ub
0.4056 0.3388 1.1969 0.2313 -0.2585 1.0697
---
Signif. codes: 0 ‘***’ 0.001 ‘**’ 0.01 ‘*’ 0.05 ‘.’ 0.1 ‘ ’ 1
VaD categorical (All)
Random-Effects Model (k = 2; tau^2 estimator: DL) logLik deviance AIC BIC AICc
-1.6261 3.7765 7.2522 4.6385 19.2522
tau^2 (estimated amount of total heterogeneity): 0.3646 (SE = 0.6958)
tau (square root of estimated tau^2 value): 0.6038
I^2 (total heterogeneity / total variability): 74.10%
H^2 (total variability / sampling variability): 3.86
Test for Heterogeneity:
Q(df = 1) = 3.8603, p-val = 0.0494
Model Results:
estimate se zval pval ci.lb ci.ub
1.0370 0.4947 2.0961 0.0361 0.0673 2.0066 *
---
Signif. codes: 0 ‘***’ 0.001 ‘**’ 0.01 ‘*’ 0.05 ‘.’ 0.1 ‘ ’ 1
Fail-safe N Calculation Using the Rosenthal Approach Fail-safe N Calculation Using the Rosenthal Approach
Observed Significance Level: <.0001
Target Significance Level: 0.05
Fail-safe N: 11
top related