Evidence Hub

Water pipe smoking and stroke: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Bagherpour-Kalo M, Jones ME, Darabi P, Hosseini M

Brain and behavior, 2024

2,759 participants · 2 citations

Abstract

Objective: Despite the damaging effects of water pipe on physical health, there is little information about the potential harmful effects of this tobacco on stroke. This study aims to investigate the relationship between water pipe smoking and stroke.

Method: A systematic review was conducted including Ovid SP, Embase, Pubmed, Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar databases with focus on cohort, case-control, and cross-sectional studies. We reviewed all studies reporting on water pipe smoking and stroke. The funnel plot and the Egger regression test were used to assess publication bias.

Results: In the four eligible studies, there were a total of 2759 participants that 555 patients had at least once experienced stroke. Meta-analysis revealed positive association between water pipe smoking and stroke with pooled adjusted OR 2.79 (95% CI: 1.74-3.84; I2=0,p=.741${I^2}\; = \;\;0,{\mathrm{\;}}p\;\; = {\mathrm{\;\;}}.741$ ) and the funnel plot shows asymmetry publication bias.

Conclusions: We found a higher effect of water pipe smoking on stroke compared to cigarette smoking and concluded that water pipe increases the risk of stroke by 2.79. Hence, because most of the water pipe consumer society is young, especially women, policies and decisions need to be taken to control the supply of this tobacco to the market and more provide education on the health problem of water pipe smoking.

Implications: This study provides a higher effect of water pipe smoking on stroke. Physicians…

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. Reported size: 2,759 participants or records.

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