2017
DOI: 10.1186/s13643-017-0444-4
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Findings, phenotypes, and outcomes in Freeman-Sheldon and Sheldon-Hall syndromes and distal arthrogryposis types 1 and 3: protocol for systematic review and patient-level data meta-analysis

Abstract: BackgroundFreeman-Sheldon and Sheldon-Hall syndromes (FSS and SHS) and distal arthrogryposis types 1 and 3 (DA1 and DA3) are rare, often confused, congenital syndromes. Few studies exist. With reported diagnosis unreliable, it would be scientifically inappropriate to consider articles describing FSS, SHS, DA1, or DA3, unless diagnoses were independently verified, rendering conventional systematic review and meta-analysis methodology inappropriate and necessitating patient-level data analysis (PROSPERO: CRD4201… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

1
11
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

3
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 15 publications
(12 citation statements)
references
References 16 publications
1
11
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The protocol for the systematic review upon which this discussion of rehabilitation-related topics is based has been completed as part of the unfunded FBS clinical practice guideline development process, received Institutional Review Board approval from FSRG IRB #1 (UTN: U1111-1172-4670), was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42015024740), and published elsewhere. 21 A comprehensive review of FBS is beyond the scope of this discussion. As part of this decadelong effort to clarify the descriptor, 1 definition, classification, 2 and clinical care framework for FBS, broad, 17 and focused [18][19][20] discussions, and a meta-analysis 22 covering FBS have been published.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The protocol for the systematic review upon which this discussion of rehabilitation-related topics is based has been completed as part of the unfunded FBS clinical practice guideline development process, received Institutional Review Board approval from FSRG IRB #1 (UTN: U1111-1172-4670), was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42015024740), and published elsewhere. 21 A comprehensive review of FBS is beyond the scope of this discussion. As part of this decadelong effort to clarify the descriptor, 1 definition, classification, 2 and clinical care framework for FBS, broad, 17 and focused [18][19][20] discussions, and a meta-analysis 22 covering FBS have been published.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The range and severity of these features can vary from patient to patient. Usually, the patient's intelligence is unaffected and mostly normal (Poling et al, 2017). Other clinical features include rigid fingers, bilateral congenital clubfoot, constrained horizontal and vertical eye movements, inflexible back, stiff walk, anteverted slouched shoulders, and pectus excavatum (Schrander-Stumpel et al, 1993).…”
Section: Clinical Features Of Distal Arthrogryposismentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Distal Arthrogryposis Type 1 sometimes overlaps with a disorder called FSS owing to the similarity of respective clinical features ( Gurnett et al, 2010 ; Alvarado et al, 2011 ; Beck et al, 2013 ; Wang et al, 2016 ; Jin et al, 2017 ; Poling et al, 2017 ). The prevalence of DA is estimated to be ∼1 in every 3,000 people worldwide ( Hall et al, 1982 ; Bamshad et al, 1996 ; Beals, 2005 ), and it is more common than other types.…”
Section: Clinical Features Of Distal Arthrogryposismentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We delineate an approach to nonoperative orthodontic treatment for FBS is discussed, in the context of a case presentation of a 16-year-old girl (Figures 1 –6 and Supplemental Data Figure 1 and Table 1) treated for retrognathia associated with FBS. Literature reviewed originates from 2 larger systematic reviews, whose methodologies and search strategies have been published elsewhere (Poling, Morales Corado, Chamberlain, 2017; Poling and Morales Corado, 2015; Poling and Dufresne, 2018c), and we have published a more comprehensive narrative review elsewhere (Poling, Dufresne, and Chamerlain, 2019).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%