한빛사
>
상위피인용논문
상위피인용논문
- 조회17
대전대학교 한의과대학(대전한방병원, 만성피로증후군연구센터)
J. Transl. Med., Feb 24 2020, 18 (1) 100 | https://doi.org/10.1186/s12967-020-02269-0
Systematic review and meta-analysis of the prevalence of chronic fatigue syndrome/myalgic encephalomyelitis (CFS/ME)
Eun-Jin Lim 1, Yo-Chan Ahn 2, Eun-Su Jang 1, Si-Woo Lee 3, Su-Hwa Lee 4, Chang-Gue Son 1,*
1Institute of Bioscience and Integrative Medicine, Department of Korean Medicine, Daejeon University, 62 Daehak-ro, Dong-gu, Daejeon, Republic of Korea
2Department of Health Service Management, Daejeon University, 96-3 Yongun-dong, Dong-gu, Daejeon, 300-716 Republic of Korea
3Division of Future Medicine, Korean Institute of Oriental Medicine, Yuseong-daero, 1672 Daejeon, Republic of Korea
4The Catholic University of Korea, Daejeon St. Mary Hospital, 64, Daeheung-ro, Jung-gu, Daejeon, Republic of Korea
2Department of Health Service Management, Daejeon University, 96-3 Yongun-dong, Dong-gu, Daejeon, 300-716 Republic of Korea
3Division of Future Medicine, Korean Institute of Oriental Medicine, Yuseong-daero, 1672 Daejeon, Republic of Korea
4The Catholic University of Korea, Daejeon St. Mary Hospital, 64, Daeheung-ro, Jung-gu, Daejeon, Republic of Korea
*Corresponding author: correspondence to Chang-Gue Son
Abstract
Background
Chronic fatigue syndrome/myalgic encephalomyelitis (CFS/ME) has been emerging as a significant health issue worldwide. This study aimed to systemically assess the prevalence of CFS/ME in various aspects of analyses for precise assessment.
Methods
We systematically searched prevalence of CFS/ME from public databases from 1980 to December 2018. Data were extracted according to 7 categories for analysis: study participants, gender and age of the participants, case definition, diagnostic method, publication year, and country of the study conducted. Prevalence data were collected and counted individually for studies adopted various case definitions. We analyzed and estimated prevalence rates in various angles: average prevalence, pooled prevalence and meta-analysis of all studies.
Results
A total of 1291 articles were initially identified, and 45 articles (46 studies, 56 prevalence data) were selected for this study. Total 1085,976 participants were enrolled from community-based survey (540,901) and primary care sites (545,075). The total average prevalence was 1.40 ± 1.57%, pooled prevalence 0.39%, and meta-analysis 0.68% [95% CI 0.48–0.97]. The prevalence rates were varied by enrolled participants (gender, study participants, and population group), case definitions and diagnostic methods. For example, in the meta-analysis; women (1.36% [95% CI 0.48–0.97]) vs. men (0.86% [95% CI 0.48–0.97]), community-based samples (0.76% [95% CI 0.53–1.10]) vs. primary care sites (0.63% [95% CI 0.37–1.10]), adults ≥ 18 years (0.65% [95% CI 0.43–0.99]) vs. children and adolescents < 18 years (0.55% [95% CI 0.22–1.35]), CDC-1994 (0.89% [95% CI 0.60–1.33]) vs. Holmes (0.17% [95% CI 0.06–0.49]), and interviews (1.14% [95% CI 0.76–1.72]) vs. physician diagnosis (0.09% [95% CI 0.05–0.13]), respectively.
Conclusions
This study comprehensively estimated the prevalence of CFS/ME; 0.89% according to the most commonly used case definition CDC-1994, with women approximately 1.5 to 2 folds higher than men in all categories. However, we observed the prevalence rates are widely varied particularly by case definitions and diagnostic methods. An objective diagnostic tool is urgently required for rigorous assessment of the prevalence of CFS/ME.
Chronic fatigue syndrome/myalgic encephalomyelitis (CFS/ME) has been emerging as a significant health issue worldwide. This study aimed to systemically assess the prevalence of CFS/ME in various aspects of analyses for precise assessment.
Methods
We systematically searched prevalence of CFS/ME from public databases from 1980 to December 2018. Data were extracted according to 7 categories for analysis: study participants, gender and age of the participants, case definition, diagnostic method, publication year, and country of the study conducted. Prevalence data were collected and counted individually for studies adopted various case definitions. We analyzed and estimated prevalence rates in various angles: average prevalence, pooled prevalence and meta-analysis of all studies.
Results
A total of 1291 articles were initially identified, and 45 articles (46 studies, 56 prevalence data) were selected for this study. Total 1085,976 participants were enrolled from community-based survey (540,901) and primary care sites (545,075). The total average prevalence was 1.40 ± 1.57%, pooled prevalence 0.39%, and meta-analysis 0.68% [95% CI 0.48–0.97]. The prevalence rates were varied by enrolled participants (gender, study participants, and population group), case definitions and diagnostic methods. For example, in the meta-analysis; women (1.36% [95% CI 0.48–0.97]) vs. men (0.86% [95% CI 0.48–0.97]), community-based samples (0.76% [95% CI 0.53–1.10]) vs. primary care sites (0.63% [95% CI 0.37–1.10]), adults ≥ 18 years (0.65% [95% CI 0.43–0.99]) vs. children and adolescents < 18 years (0.55% [95% CI 0.22–1.35]), CDC-1994 (0.89% [95% CI 0.60–1.33]) vs. Holmes (0.17% [95% CI 0.06–0.49]), and interviews (1.14% [95% CI 0.76–1.72]) vs. physician diagnosis (0.09% [95% CI 0.05–0.13]), respectively.
Conclusions
This study comprehensively estimated the prevalence of CFS/ME; 0.89% according to the most commonly used case definition CDC-1994, with women approximately 1.5 to 2 folds higher than men in all categories. However, we observed the prevalence rates are widely varied particularly by case definitions and diagnostic methods. An objective diagnostic tool is urgently required for rigorous assessment of the prevalence of CFS/ME.
논문정보
- Research article
- 2020년 02월 (BRIC 등록일 2026-04-30)
- 국내 연구진
- 생명과학 > 생명과학 기타
- 120회 이상 인용된 논문
댓글 작성 로그인
팝업 닫기
![[에펜도르프] 2026 상반기 특별 프로모션 : 프리미엄 에펜도르프 제품을 좋은 혜택으로 만날 수 있는 기회!](/app/board/attach/image/1348816_1772455401000.do?)
