ArticlePloS one2026
Multimorbidity in the Brazilian adult population: Protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis of prevalence.
Article in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Multimorbidity (MM), defined as the co-occurrence of multiple chronic conditions in a single individual, poses a major challenge to health systems. Its consequences include higher morbidity and mortality rates, reduced quality of life, and increased healthcare costs. Despite its substantial public health burden, no systematic reviews have comprehensively assessed the pooled prevalence of MM in Brazil. This manuscript outlines a protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis aimed at estimating the prevalence of MM among community-dwelling adults in Brazil. We will conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of population-based studies reporting MM prevalence in community settings. A comprehensive search will be performed in PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Embase, LILACS, and SciELO databases. Two independent reviewers will screen articles, assess study quality using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Checklist for prevalence studies, and extract data. For the meta-analysis, pooled estimates will be calculated using random-effects models with Restricted Maximum Likelihood (REML) estimators to account for between-study variability. Heterogeneity will be assessed using the I² statistic and Cochran's Q test. Subgroups analyses (e.g., age group, sex, region, and study type) will be conducted where feasible. Findings will be reported following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The protocol is registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42024389106). This review will provide comprehensive evidence on MM prevalence in Brazil, identifying the burden of this problem for future research and informing public health strategies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.