Evidence Hub

Comparison of central precocious puberty frequency before and during COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Zhang J, Xu J, Tang X, Wu R

BMC endocrine disorders, 2024

3 citations

Abstract

Objective: The current systematic review and meta-analysis assessed the prevalence of central precocious puberty (CPP) throughout the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic.

Design: A systematic review and meta-analysis were carried out following the principles outlined by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA, 2020).

Data sources: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and WANFANG databases were searched from January 1, 2019, to March 30, 2023.

Eligibility criteria for selecting studies: (1) children and adolescents ≤ 15 years; (2) studies with the outcome of frequency of central precocious puberty, measured prior to and throughout the COVID-19 pandemic; (3) a novel CPP diagnosis was created depending on all of the following criteria: girls with a chronological age 0.3 UI/L, and/or GnRH-stimulated peak LH levels > 5 IU/L.

Data extraction and synthesis: The process of extracting data and evaluating the likelihood of bias was carried out by two independent reviewers. The data were pooled employing the generic inverse-variance method and presented as mean differences (MDs) with 95% CIs. The evaluation of heterogeneity was conducted employing the Cochran Q statistic, and the degree of heterogeneity was measured employing the I2 statistic.

Results: This meta-analysis included 17 studies. In contrast to the same period prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, the occurrence of CPP elevated (OR = 2.57; 95% CI, 1.85-3.56). Moreover, body mass…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free