The association of red meat consumption and mental health in women: A cross-sectional study
Darooghegi Mofrad M, Mozaffari H, Sheikhi A, Zamani B, Azadbakht L
Complementary therapies in medicine · 16 citas
Etiquetas de revisión
Cuestionario de frecuencia de consumoSin ajuste declarado por estilo de vidaDatos neutrales que nuestra revisión registró sobre cómo se hizo este estudio. Describen el método, nunca si nos gusta el resultado.
Cómo se estudió
- Diseño
- Estudio transversal (indexado por PubMed)
- Estudiado en
- Personas
- Resultado principal
- Marcadores de salud y funcionamiento
- Consumo medido con
- Cuestionario de frecuencia de consumo
Quién lo pagó
- Financiación
- Financiación independiente
- Universidad u hospital
- Tehran University of Medical Sciences and Health Services
Según 1 financiador declarado.
Publicación
- Publicado
- 2020-10-08 · Complement Ther Med · vol. 56 · pág. 102588
- Editorial
- Elsevier BV
- Citado
- 33 citas · más que el 93% de estudios similares · 3.4× el promedio de su campo
- Impacto
- Entre el 10 % más citado de su campo
- Referencias
- 36 trabajos
- Acceso
- Acceso abierto (revista híbrida) · CC-BY-NC-ND
- Áreas de investigación
- Nutritional Studies and Diet · Agriculture Sustainability and Environmental Impact · Consumer Attitudes and Food Labeling
- Palabras clave
- Medicine, Red meat, Anxiety, Cross-sectional study, Confounding, Depression (economics), Mental distress, Quartile, Mental health, Logistic regression, Environmental health, Internal medicine, Confidence interval, Psychiatry
- MeSH
- humans, diet, cross-sectional studies, depression, stress, psychological, anxiety, mental health, adult, iran, female, young adult, surveys and questionnaires, red meat
5 autores
- Manije Darooghegi Mofrad🇮🇷Tehran University of Medical Sciences
- Hadis Mozaffari🇨🇦University of British Columbia
- Ali Sheikhi🇮🇷Tehran University of Medical Sciences
- Behzad Zamani🇮🇷Tehran University of Medical Sciences
- Leila Azadbakht🇮🇷 · autor de correspondenciaIsfahan University of Medical Sciences; University of Isfahan; Tehran University of Medical Sciences
Resumen
El texto original del estudio, en el idioma en que se publicó.
Objectives
Previous studies have shown that red meat consumption has beneficial effects on health. The purpose of this study was to determine the relationship between red meat consumption and depression, anxiety and psychological distress in Tehrani women.
Methods
In this cross-sectional study, 482 women aged 20-50 years old referred to the health centers of Tehran University of Medical Sciences in 2018 were selected by multistage cluster sampling. The usual dietary intake was evaluated using a semi-quantitative food frequency questionnaire containing 168 items that its validity and reliability were approved previously. The red meat category was defined as the sum of red meats (beef, lamb), and organ meats (beef liver, kidney, and heart, ruminant meat). Psychological disorders were assessed using a validated Depression, Anxiety, Stress Scales (DASS) questionnaires with 21-items. In the logistic regression analysis, the results were adjusted to the confounding factors.
Results
The mean age of the study participants was 31.87 ± 7.6 years. The prevalence of depressive symptoms, anxiety and psychological distress among participants was 34%, 40% and 42%, respectively. After controlling for potential confounders, women in the highest quartile of red meat had a highest prevalence of depressive symptoms (OR: 2.51; 95% CI: 1.32-4.76; p = 0.002), anxiety (OR: 1.82; 95% CI: 1.00-3.29; p = 0.034) and stress (OR: 3.47; 95% CI: 1.88-6.42; p < 0.001) compared with those in the lowest quartile.
Conclusions
We found a significant association between red meat intake and mental health in women. Prospective studies are needed to confirm these findings.
Resumen vía Europe PMC. Los derechos de autor siguen siendo de los autores o la editorial (CC BY-NC-ND).
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.