Red and Processed Meat Consumption and Risk for All-Cause Mortality and Cardiometabolic Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Cohort Studies
Zeraatkar D, Han MA, Guyatt GH, Vernooij RWM, El Dib R, Cheung K, Milio K, Zworth M, Bartoszko JJ, Valli C, Rabassa M, Lee Y, Zajac J, Prokop-Dorner A, Lo C, Bala MM, Alonso-Coello P, Hanna SE, Johnston BC
Annals of internal medicine · 159 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
- Meta-analysis (indexed by PubMed)
- Studied in
- People
- Main outcome
- Clinical events such as disease or death
- Intake measured by
- Not stated
Who paid for it
- Funding
- Funding not disclosed
Publication
- Published
- 2019-10-01 · Ann Intern Med · vol. 171 · issue 10 · pp. 703–710
- Publisher
- American College of Physicians
- Cited
- 245 citations · more than 100% of similar papers · 27.6× the field average
- Impact
- Top 10% most cited in its field
- References
- 40 works
- Access
- Open access (repository copy) · CC-BY-NC-ND
- Research areas
- Nutritional Studies and Diet · Agriculture Sustainability and Environmental Impact · Consumer Attitudes and Food Labeling
- Keywords
- Medicine, Red meat, CINAHL, MEDLINE, Environmental health, Cohort study, Internal medicine, Psychological intervention, Pathology
- MeSH
- humans, cardiovascular diseases, myocardial infarction, diabetes mellitus, type 2, diet, meat products, stroke, red meat
19 authors
From CA, KR, NL, PL, US, ES
- Dena ZeraatkarMcMaster University
- Mi Ah HanChosun University
- Gordon Henry GuyattMcMaster University
- Robin W.M. VernooijDalhousie University; Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organisation
- Regina El DibDalhousie University
- Kevin J. CheungMcMaster University
Abstract
This article has been corrected. The original version (PDF) is appended to this article as a Supplement.
Background
Dietary guidelines generally recommend limiting intake of red and processed meat. However, the quality of evidence implicating red and processed meat in adverse health outcomes remains unclear.
Purpose
To evaluate the association between red and processed meat consumption and all-cause mortality, cardiometabolic outcomes, quality of life, and satisfaction with diet among adults.
Data sources
EMBASE (Elsevier), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (Wiley), Web of Science (Clarivate Analytics), CINAHL (EBSCO), and ProQuest from inception until July 2018 and MEDLINE from inception until April 2019, without language restrictions, as well as bibliographies of relevant articles.
Study selection
Cohort studies with at least 1000 participants that reported an association between unprocessed red or processed meat intake and outcomes of interest.
Data extraction
Teams of 2 reviewers independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias. One investigator assessed certainty of evidence, and the senior investigator confirmed the assessments.
Data synthesis
Of 61 articles reporting on 55 cohorts with more than 4 million participants, none addressed quality of life or satisfaction with diet. Low-certainty evidence was found that a reduction in unprocessed red meat intake of 3 servings per week is associated with a very small reduction in risk for cardiovascular mortality, stroke, myocardial infarction (MI), and type 2 diabetes. Likewise, low-certainty evidence was found that a reduction in processed meat intake of 3 servings per week is associated with a very small decrease in risk for all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, stroke, MI, and type 2 diabetes.
Limitation
Inadequate adjustment for known confounders, residual confounding due to observational design, and recall bias associated with dietary measurement.
Conclusion
The magnitude of association between red and processed meat consumption and all-cause mortality and adverse cardiometabolic outcomes is very small, and the evidence is of low certainty.
Primary funding source
None. (PROSPERO: CRD42017074074).
Abstract via Europe PMC. Copyright remains with the authors or publisher.
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.