Patterns of Red and Processed Meat Consumption and Risk for Cardiometabolic and Cancer Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Cohort Studies
Vernooij RWM, Zeraatkar D, Han MA, El Dib R, Zworth M, Milio K, Sit D, Lee Y, Gomaa H, Valli C, Swierz MJ, Chang Y, Hanna SE, Brauer PM, Sievenpiper J, de Souza R, Alonso-Coello P, Bala MM, Guyatt GH, Johnston BC
Annals of internal medicine · 92 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. 732–741
- Publisher
- American College of Physicians
- Cited
- 153 citations · more than 100% of similar papers · 21.0× the field average
- Impact
- Top 10% most cited in its field
- References
- 41 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, Confounding, Observational study, Cancer, CINAHL, Cohort study, Internal medicine, Psychological intervention, Pathology
- MeSH
- humans, neoplasms, cardiovascular diseases, diet, meat products, red meat
20 authors
From CA, NL, KR, EG, ES, PL, US
- Robin W.M. VernooijDalhousie University; Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organisation
- Dena ZeraatkarMcMaster University
- Mi Ah HanChosun University
- Regina El DibDalhousie University
- Max ZworthMcMaster University
- Kirolos MilioMcMaster University
Abstract
This article has been corrected. The original version (PDF) is appended to this article as a Supplement.
Background
Studying dietary patterns may provide insights into the potential effects of red and processed meat on health outcomes.
Purpose
To evaluate the effect of dietary patterns, including different amounts of red or processed meat, on all-cause mortality, cardiometabolic outcomes, and cancer incidence and mortality.
Data sources
Systematic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, CINAHL, Web of Science, and ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global from inception to April 2019 with no restrictions on year or language.
Study selection
Teams of 2 reviewers independently screened search results and included prospective cohort studies with 1000 or more participants that reported on the association between dietary patterns and health outcomes.
Data extraction
Two reviewers independently extracted data, assessed risk of bias, and evaluated the certainty of evidence using GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) criteria.
Data synthesis
Eligible studies that followed patients for 2 to 34 years revealed low- to very-low-certainty evidence that dietary patterns lower in red and processed meat intake result in very small or possibly small decreases in all-cause mortality, cancer mortality and incidence, cardiovascular mortality, nonfatal coronary heart disease, fatal and nonfatal myocardial infarction, and type 2 diabetes. For all-cause, cancer, and cardiovascular mortality and incidence of some types of cancer, the total sample included more than 400 000 patients; for other outcomes, total samples included 4000 to more than 300 000 patients.
Limitation
Observational studies are prone to residual confounding, and these studies provide low- or very-low-certainty evidence according to the GRADE criteria.
Conclusion
Low- or very-low-certainty evidence suggests that dietary patterns with less red and processed meat intake may result in very small reductions in adverse cardiometabolic and cancer outcomes.
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.