Meta-analysisindependent cross-checkabstract only checked I-LEG-09 standard review
Global G6PD prevalence
The global prevalence of glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase deficiency: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Overview
Nkhoma ET et al.. Blood Cells Mol Dis 2009 · PMID 19233695 · DOI 10.1016/j.bcmd.2008.12.005
About 400 million people have G6PD deficiency worldwide; highest in sub-Saharan Africa.
Does the study support the specific claim? Partly · Methodological quality: moderate
Plain-language summary
Study explained simply
- What did the researchers want to find out?
Global prevalence
- How was the study done?
Meta-analysis
- How many people, animals or samples were studied?
280 estimates
- What was actually found?
400 million
- How large was the observed effect?
Not applicable
- What do the results mean in everyday life?
Common worldwide.
- What are the study's limitations?
Heterogeneous
- What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?
Context
- Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?
High
- What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?
Abstract gives no Egypt/Germany figures.
Scientific in-depth review
1. Full reference
- Authors
- Nkhoma ET et al.
- Journal
- Blood Cells Mol Dis
- Year
- 2009
- Identifier
- PMID 19233695 DOI 10.1016/j.bcmd.2008.12.005
- Verification
- verified – PubMed efetch 2026-10-25
- Retracted
- no
- Corrections
- none
- Extent checked
- abstract only
- Conflicts of interest and funding
not stated in abstract
2. Research question
Global prevalence of G6PD deficiency.
3. Study design and population
- Study design
- Meta-analysis – Systematic review and meta-analysis of prevalence studies
- Population
Populations in 88 countries
- Country
Global
- Period
1960-2008
- Sample size
280 prevalence estimates
- Inclusion and exclusion criteria
Cross-sectional and longitudinal studies
4. Methods and endpoints
- Exposure / intervention
Not applicable
- Comparator
Not applicable
- Endpoints
Prevalence
- Statistical methods
Meta-analysis; heterogeneity
5. Actual results
- Results
Estimated 400 million affected; highest prevalence in Sub-Saharan Africa; high heterogeneity due to assessment methods.
- Absolute risks
not reported
- Authors' conclusion
Prevalence variation is of public-health importance, particularly for neonatal health and drug distribution.
6. Strengths
- Global scope
7. Weaknesses
- Heterogeneity
- Country figures not in abstract
8. Risk of bias
- Orienting tool
- AMSTAR 2
- Type of assessment
- simplified assessment (abstract only)
- Full formal assessment
- no
- Overall risk of bias
- some concerns
- Rationale
Method heterogeneity.
9. Assessment of the statistical interpretation
Descriptive.
10. Relevance to the specific claim
Global context for C-LEG-03.
11. Independent contrary findings
None.
12. Transferability to Germany and Europe
High.
13. Overall methodological judgement
Context.
| Multidimensional assessment | |
|---|---|
| Authenticity of the source | verified |
| Methodological quality | moderate |
| Risk of bias | some concerns |
| Precision of results | low |
| Directness | direct |
| Reproducibility | replicated |
| Consistency with the overall evidence | consistent |
| Regional transferability | high |
| Adequacy of the interpretation (by the archive) | not applicable |
14. Open questions
Country-level values for Egypt and Germany (full text not accessed).