Estimating effects of whole grain consumption on type 2 diabetes, colorectal cancer and cardiovascular disease: a burden of proof study
Liu H, Zhu J, Gao R, Ding L, Yang Y, Zhao W, Cui X, Lu W, Wang J, Li Y
Nutrition journal · 4 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
- Not stated
Who paid for it
- Funding
- Independent funding
- University or hospital
- the Key Discipline of Zhejiang Province in Public Health and Preventative Medicine (First Class, Category A), Hangzhou Medical College
Based on 1 listed funder(s) and full-text disclosure statement.
Publication
- Published
- 2024-05-14 · Nutr J · vol. 23 · issue 1 · p. 49
- Publisher
- BioMed Central
- Cited
- 10 citations · more than 86% of similar papers · 2.1× the field average
- References
- 58 works
- Access
- Open access (journal) · CC-BY
- Research areas
- Food composition and properties · Nutritional Studies and Diet · Celiac Disease Research and Management
- Keywords
- Medicine, Stroke (engine), Colorectal cancer, Relative risk, Type 2 diabetes, Refined grains, Cohort study, Disease, Internal medicine, Prospective cohort study, Diabetes mellitus, Whole grains, Confidence interval, Cancer, Endocrinology, Food science
- MeSH
- humans, colorectal neoplasms, cardiovascular diseases, diabetes mellitus, type 2, diet, risk factors, prospective studies, whole grains
10 authors
From CN
- Houpu LiuHangzhou Medical College
- Jiahao ZhuHangzhou Medical College
- Rui GaoHangzhou Medical College
- Lilu DingHangzhou Medical College
- Ye YangHangzhou Medical College
- Wenxia ZhaoHangzhou Medical College
Abstract
Background
Previous studies on whole grain consumption had inconsistent findings and lacked quantitative assessments of evidence quality. Therefore, we aimed to summarize updated findings using the Burden of Proof analysis (BPRF) to investigate the relationship of whole grain consumption on type 2 diabetes (T2D), colorectal cancer (CRC), stroke, and ischemic heart disease (IHD).
Methods
We conducted a literature search in the Medline and Web of Science up to June 12, 2023, to identify related cohort studies and systematic reviews. The mean RR (relative risk) curve and uncertainty intervals (UIs), BPRF function, risk-outcome score (ROS), and the theoretical minimum risk exposure level (TMREL) were estimated to evaluate the level of four risk-outcome pairs.
Results
In total, 27 prospective cohorts were included in our analysis. Consuming whole grain at the range of TMREL (118.5-148.1 g per day) was associated with lower risks: T2D (declined by 37.3%, 95% UI: 5.8 to 59.5), CRC (declined by 17.3%, 6.5 to 27.7), stroke (declined by 21.8%, 7.3 to 35.1), and IHD (declined by 36.9%, 7.1 to 58.0). For all outcomes except stroke, we observed a non-linear, monotonic decrease as whole grain consumption increased; For stroke, it followed a J-shaped curve (the greatest decline in the risk of stroke at consuming 100 g whole grain for a day). The relationships between whole grain consumption and four diseases are all two-star pairs (ROS: 0.087, 0.068, 0.062, 0.095 for T2D, CRC, stroke, and IHD, respectively).
Conclusion
Consuming 100 g of whole grains per day offers broad protective benefits. However, exceeding this threshold may diminish the protective effects against stroke. Our findings endorse replacing refined grains with whole grains as the main source of daily carbohydrates. REGISTRY AND REGISTRY NUMBER FOR SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS OR META-ANALYSES: We have registered our research in PROSPERO, and the identifier of our meta-analyses is CRD42023447345.
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.