Processed meat intake and chronic disease morbidity and mortality: An overview of systematic reviews and meta-analyses
Händel MN, Cardoso I, Rasmussen KM, Rohde JF, Jacobsen R, Nielsen SM, Christensen R, Heitmann BL
PloS one · 22 citas
Etiquetas de revisión
Vínculos de autores con la industriaDatos neutrales que nuestra revisión registró sobre cómo se hizo este estudio. Describen el método, nunca si nos gusta el resultado.
Cómo se estudió
- Diseño
- Metaanálisis (indexado por PubMed)
- Estudiado en
- Personas
- Resultado principal
- Eventos clínicos como enfermedad o muerte
- Consumo medido con
- No se indica
Quién lo pagó
- Financiación
- Posiblemente financiado por la industria
- Organización sin fines de lucro
- Oak Foundation
- Organización sin fines de lucro
- Parker Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy
- Autores
- Al menos un autor declara un vínculo económico con la industria
- Subvenciones
- Oak Foundation (OCAY - 13 - 309)
Según 2 financiadores declarados y la declaración de financiación del texto completo.
Publicación
- Publicado
- 2019-10-17 · PLoS One · vol. 14 · número 10 · pág. e0223883
- Editorial
- Public Library of Science
- Citado
- 29 citas · más que el 71% de estudios similares · 1.0× el promedio de su campo
- Referencias
- 53 trabajos
- Acceso
- Acceso abierto (revista) · CC-BY
- Áreas de investigación
- Nutritional Studies and Diet · Consumer Attitudes and Food Labeling · Agriculture Sustainability and Environmental Impact
- Palabras clave
- Systematic review, Meta-analysis, Medicine, MEDLINE, Grading (engineering), Environmental health, Pathology, Biology
- MeSH
- humans, neoplasms, cardiovascular diseases, diabetes mellitus, type 2, chronic disease, risk factors, meat products, databases, factual
8 autores
- Mina Nicole Händel🇩🇰 · autor de correspondenciaUniversity of Copenhagen; Frederiksberg Hospital
- Isabel Cardoso🇩🇰University of Copenhagen; Frederiksberg Hospital
- Katrine Marie Rasmussen🇩🇰University of Copenhagen; Frederiksberg Hospital
- Jeanett Friis Rohde🇩🇰University of Copenhagen; Frederiksberg Hospital
- Ramunë Jacobsen🇩🇰University of Copenhagen; Frederiksberg Hospital
- Sabrina Mai Nielsen🇩🇰University of Copenhagen; University of Southern Denmark; Frederiksberg Hospital; Odense University Hospital
- Robin Christensen🇩🇰University of Copenhagen; University of Southern Denmark; Frederiksberg Hospital; Odense University Hospital
- Berit L. Heitmann🇩🇰🇦🇺University of Copenhagen; The University of Sydney; Frederiksberg Hospital
Resumen
El texto original del estudio, en el idioma en que se publicó.
Despite the nutritional value of meat, a large volume of reviews and meta-analyses suggests that processed meat intake is associated with an increased risk of chronic diseases. However, assessments of the quality of these published reviews internal validity are generally lacking. We systematically reviewed and assessed the quality alongside summarizing the results of previously published systematic reviews and meta-analyses that examined the association between processed meat intake and cancers, type II diabetes (T2D), and cardiovascular diseases (CVD). Reviews and meta-analyses published until May 2018 were identified through a systematic literature search in the databases MEDLINE and EMBASE, and reference lists of included reviews. The quality of the systematic reviews and meta-analyses was assessed using A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR). All eligible reviews had to comply with two quality requirements: providing sufficient information on quality assessment of the primary studies and a comprehensive search. The results were summarized for T2D, CVD, and each of the different cancer types. The certainty in the estimates of the individual outcomes was rated using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) method. In total, 22 systematic reviews were eligible and thus included in this review. More than 100 reviews were excluded because quality assessment of the primary studies had not been performed. The AMSTAR score of the included reviews ranged from 5 to 8 indicating moderate quality. Overall, the quality assessments of primary studies of the reviews are generally lacking; the scientific quality of the systematic reviews reporting positive associations between processed meat intake and risk of various cancers, T2D and CVD is moderate, and the results from case-control studies suggest more often a positive association than the results from cohort studies. The overall certainty in the evidence was very low across all individual outcomes, due to serious risk of bias and imprecision.
Resumen vía Europe PMC. Los derechos de autor siguen siendo de los autores o la editorial (CC BY).
Confianza de la comunidad
Cargando…
¿Cuánto confías en los hallazgos de este estudio?
Comentarios
¿Algo está mal aquí?
Señala este estudio si su información, etiquetas o financiación parecen incorrectas. Un editor revisa cada señalamiento.
Información educativa sobre investigación publicada. No es consejo médico ni una recomendación para empezar o dejar nada.