Meta-analysis2025

Effect of egg consumption on health outcomes: An updated umbrella review of systematic reviews and meta-analysis of observational and intervention studies

Formisano E, Lopes Neri LC, Caffa I, Borgarelli C, Ferrando MR, Proietti E, Turrini F, Martini D, Angelino D, Tagliabue A, Pisciotta L

Nutrition, metabolism, and cardiovascular diseases : NMCD · 2 citations

Review labels

Funding not disclosed

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
2025-01-04 · Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis · vol. 35 · issue 5 · p. 103849
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Cited
10 citations · more than 90% of similar papers · 2.9× the field average
Impact
Top 10% most cited in its field
References
71 works
Access
Open access (hybrid journal) · OTHER-OA
Research areas
Nutritional Studies and Diet · Obesity, Physical Activity, Diet · Consumer Attitudes and Food Labeling
Keywords
Dyslipidemia, Medicine, Observational study, Meta-analysis, Systematic review, Internal medicine, Environmental health, MEDLINE, Obesity, Biology
MeSH
humans, neoplasms, risk assessment, risk factors, risk reduction behavior, health status, nutritive value, eggs, adult, middle aged, female, male, recommended dietary allowances, protective factors, biomarkers, observational studies as topic, diet, healthy

11 authors

From IT

  • Elena FormisanoOspedale Policlinico San Martino; University of Genoa
  • Lenycia de Cassya Lopes NeriUniversity of Pavia
  • Irene CaffaOspedale Policlinico San Martino; University of Genoa
  • Consuelo BorgarelliUniversity of Genoa
  • Maria Regina FerrandoUniversity of Genoa
  • Elisa ProiettiUniversity of Genoa

Abstract

Aims

To evaluate the effect of egg consumption on health outcomes.

Data synthesis

A systematic search in PubMed, Scopus, Lilacs, and Web of Science was developed using terms ("egg consumption" or "egg intake") and ("health" or "chronic diseases" or "diabetes" or "cancer" or "cholesterol" or "dyslipidemia"), and meta-analyses of observational or interventional studies published since January 2020 were included. The studies' quality was evaluated through AMSTAR-2 and NutriGrade, and the strength of evidence according to sample size, heterogeneity, and quality of articles. Fourteen meta-analyses were included (10 observational, 4 interventional studies). The wide range of outcomes, with substantial variability and high heterogeneity, indicated a lack of robust evidence. The overall quality of studies was critically low. The level of evidence was very weak for all the significant associations: risk of heart failure (RR 1.15; 95%CI: 1.02-1.30), cancer mortality (RR 1.13; 95%CI 1.06-1.20), higher levels of LDL cholesterol (WMD 7.39; 95%CI 5.82-8.95), total cholesterol (WMD 9.12; 95%CI 7.35-10.89), and apolipoprotein B-100 (WMD 0.06; 95%CI 0.03-0.08). Conversely, egg intake has been weakly associated with improvements in HDL cholesterol (WMD 1.37; 95%CI 0.49-2.25), apolipoprotein A1 (WMD 0.03; 95%CI 0.01-0.05), and growth parameters in children (WMD 0.47; 95%CI 0.13-0.80). No evidence of association was found among all cardiovascular outcomes and all-cause mortality risk between high vs. low egg consumption.

Conclusion

Due to the critically low strength of studies, insufficient evidence is available to discourage egg consumption, suggesting eggs can be part of a healthy diet.

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?

0 · not at all10 · completely

Comments

Sign in to rate, comment on or flag this study.Sign in

Something 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 in

Educational information about published research. Not medical advice, and not a recommendation to start or stop anything.