Nut consumption and risk of atrial fibrillation in the Physicians' Health Study
Khawaja O, Gaziano JM, Djousse L
Nutrition journal · 9 citations
Review labels
Neutral facts our review recorded about how this study was done. They describe method, never whether we like the result.
How it was studied
- Design
- Cohort study (indexed by PubMed)
- Studied in
- People
- Main outcome
- Clinical events such as disease or death
- Intake measured by
- Food frequency questionnaire
Who paid for it
- Funding
- Independent funding
- Government
- National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute
- Government
- National Cancer Institute
- Government
- NCI NIH HHS
- Government
- NHLBI NIH HHS
- Grants
- National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (HL-34595); National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (HL 26490); National Cancer Institute (HL 26490); National Cancer Institute (CA 34944); National Cancer Institute (CA-097193); National Cancer Institute (HL-34595); National Cancer Institute (CA 40360); National Cancer Institute (R01CA097193)
Based on 4 listed funder(s) and full-text disclosure statement.
Publication
- Published
- 2012-03-21 · Nutr J · vol. 11 · issue 1 · p. 17
- Publisher
- BioMed Central
- Cited
- 13 citations · more than 65% of similar papers · 0.4× the field average
- References
- 32 works
- Access
- Open access (journal) · CC-BY
- Research areas
- Nuts composition and effects · Oral Health Pathology and Treatment · Botany, Ecology, and Taxonomy Studies
- Keywords
- Medicine, Atrial fibrillation, Hazard ratio, Body mass index, Internal medicine, Prospective cohort study, Nut, Incidence (geometry), Confidence interval, Cardiology, Demography
- MeSH
- humans, nuts, atrial fibrillation, body mass index, diet, incidence, multivariate analysis, proportional hazards models, odds ratio, risk factors, follow-up studies, prospective studies, health status, adult, aged, aged, 80 and over, middle aged, physicians, male, randomized controlled trials as topic, surveys and questionnaires
3 authors
From US
- Owais A. Khawaja · correspondingBrigham and Women's Hospital; Harvard University
- J Michael GazianoBrigham and Women's Hospital; Harvard University; Geriatric Research Education and Clinical Center
- Luc DjousséBrigham and Women's Hospital; Harvard University; Geriatric Research Education and Clinical Center
Abstract
Background
Atrial Fibrillation is highly prevalent in clinical practice affecting approximately 2.3 million people in USA and 4.5 million people in European Union. The aim of the study was to examine the association between nut consumption and incident atrial fibrillation.
Methods
Prospective cohort of 21,054 male participants of Physicians' Health Study I. Nut consumption was estimated using food frequency questionnaire and incident atrial fibrillation was ascertained through yearly follow-up questionnaires. Cox regression was used to estimate relative risks of atrial fibrillation.
Results
The average age was 54.6 ± 9.5 years (40.7-87.1). During a mean follow up of 20 years (median 24 years), 3,317 cases of atrial fibrillation occurred. The crude incidence rate was 7.6, 7.4, 8.2, 7.9, and 6.8 cases/1000 person-years for people reporting nut consumption of rarely/never, 1-3/month, 1/per week, 2-6/week, and ≥ 7/week, respectively. Multivariable adjusted hazard ratios (95% CI) for incident atrial fibrillation were 1.00 (ref), 1.00 (0.90-1.11), 1.09 (0.97-1.21), 1.07 (0.95-1.21), and 0.91 (0.70-1.17) for nut consumption from the lowest to the highest category of nut consumption (p for trend 0.26). No statistically significant association between nut consumption and atrial fibrillation was found when stratified by body mass index (BMI < 25 vs ≥ 25 kg/m2) or age (< 65 vs. ≥ 65 years).
Conclusions
Our data did not show an association between nut consumption and incident atrial fibrillation among US male physicians.
Abstract via Europe PMC. Copyright remains with the authors or publisher (CC BY).
Community trust
Loading…
How much do you trust this study's findings?
Comments
Sign in to rate, comment on or flag this study.Sign inSomething wrong here?
Flag this study if its information, labels or funding look wrong. An editor reviews every flag.
Sign in to rate, comment on or flag this study.Sign inEducational information about published research. Not medical advice, and not a recommendation to start or stop anything.