SynthesisEuropean journal of clinical nutrition2018
A summary of meat intakes and health burdens.
Synthesis in European journal of clinical nutrition, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
25 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 61 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Perceived barriers to adopting more plant-based diets across sociodemographic groups: findings from a population-based survey in Finland.Journal of nutritional science · 2026Article
- Does Poultry Consumption Increase the Risk of Mortality for Gastrointestinal Cancers? A Preliminary Competing Risk Analysis.Nutrients · 2025Article
- Global impact of dietary risks on cancers: burdens across regions from 1990 to 2021 and the projection to 2035.Frontiers in nutrition · 2025Article
- Reduced red and processed meat consumption is associated with lower diet costs in US households: a national analysis of protein substitutions.Public health nutrition · 2024Article
- Meat consumption and obesity: A climate-friendly way to reduce health inequalities.Public health challenges · 2024Article
- A blended face-to-face and eHealth lifestyle intervention on physical activity, diet, and health outcomes in Hong Kong community-dwelling older adults: a study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.Frontiers in public health · 2024Article
- Dietary patterns - A scoping review for Nordic Nutrition Recommendations 2023.Food & nutrition research · 2024Article
- Satiating Capacity of Plant-Based Meat in Realistic Meal Contexts at Home.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Global burden of ischemic heart disease associated with high red and processed meat consumption: an analysis of 204 countries and territories between 1990 and 2019.BMC public health · 2023Article
- Changes in global food consumption increase GHG emissions despite efficiency gains along global supply chains.Nature food · 2023Article
- Article
- A taste of things to come: Effect of temporal order of information and product experience on evaluation of healthy and sustainable plant-based products.Frontiers in nutrition · 2022Article
- Modeling the Contribution of Meat to Global Nutrient Availability.Frontiers in nutrition · 2022Article
- Meat and Human Health-Current Knowledge and Research Gaps.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- Effect of Cooking Methods on the Antioxidant Capacity of Foods of Animal Origin Submitted to In Vitro Digestion-Fermentation.Antioxidants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages and fruit juice and human cancer: a systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis of observational studies.Journal of Cancer · 2021Article
- Article
- Analysis of Low Cancer Mortality Rates in the Wine Regions of Tokaj and Balaton in Hungary.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020Article
- Low Dietary n-6/n-3 PUFA Ratio Regulates Meat Quality, Reduces Triglyceride Content, and Improves Fatty Acid Composition of Meat in Heigai Pigs.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This review summarizes published meta-analysis outcomes on the associations between meat intakes and burden of diseases. A novel assessment process was developed, combining selected Cochrane Review measures, AMSTAR checklist, and other quality measures identified by authors during preliminary phases of the review process. Meat intakes have been found to be statistically significant associated with 21 burden of diseases. A total of 37 risk-outcome best dose-response estimations were identified, all were positively associated, and 21 of them with low to moderate, or insignificant heterogeneity. The highest dose-responses per 50 g increases in processed meat intake at 95% confident levels were 1.81 (1.32, 2.48) for esophageal cancer, 1.71 (1.34, 2.19) for stomach cancer, 1.42 (1.07, 1.89) for CHD, 1.32 (1.19, 1.48) for diabetes, and 1.24 (1.13, 1.35) for colon cancer incidences, and 1.24 (1.09, 1.40) for CVD mortality. The highest dose-responses per each 65 g increases in total red meat intake were 1.36 (1.16, 1.58) for endometrial cancer, 1.25 (1.10, 1.41) esophageal cancer, and 1.22 (1.16, 1.23) for lung cancer incidences. In addition, 14 statistically significant associations in terms of high vs low meat intake relative risks were also identified. Total red meat intakes were found negatively associated with CVD and cancer mortalities, and poultry meat intakes were found negatively associated with all-cause and cancer mortalities, and rectal cancer incidences in low meat consumption Asian countries. Current global and dietary Comparative Risk Assessments may underestimate burden of diseases attributed to meat intakes. More investigation is needed in low-meat consumption countries.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.