Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28855166›Full record

SynthesisJournal of the American Heart Association2017

Role of Total, Red, Processed, and White Meat Consumption in Stroke Incidence and Mortality: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Prospective Cohort Studies.

Kyuwoong Kim, Junghyeon Hyeon, Sang Ah Lee, Sung Ok Kwon, Hyejin Lee, NaNa Keum, Jong-Koo Lee, Sang Min Park

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of the American Heart Association, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 70 papers, 13 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
70citing papers in PubMed, 13 pooled it
9.2field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

70 citing papers in PubMed, 13 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 114 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Pooled it
  14. Trial
  15. Effects of red meat taxes and warning labels on food groups selected in a randomized controlled trial.The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity · 2024
    Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Trial
  19. Trial
  20. Trial

10 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Kyuwoong KimDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, Seoul National University Graduate School, Seoul, Korea.
Junghyeon HyeonDepartment of Family Medicine, College of Medicine, Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea.
Sang Ah LeeDepartment of Preventive Medicine, College of Medicine, Kangwon National University, Gangwon-do, Korea.
Sung Ok KwonDepartment of Preventive Medicine, College of Medicine, Kangwon National University, Gangwon-do, Korea.
Hyejin LeeDepartment of Family Medicine, College of Medicine, Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea.
NaNa KeumDepartment of Nutrition, T.H Chan School of Public Health, Harvard University, Boston, MA.
Jong-Koo LeeJW Lee Center for Global Medicine, College of Medicine, Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea.
Sang Min ParkDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, Seoul National University Graduate School, Seoul, Korea smpark.snuh@gmail.com.
Seoul National University · KRKangwon National University · KRHarvard University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPrevious meta-analyses on meat intake and risk of stroke did not report the effect of white meat (poultry meat, excluding fish) and did not examine stroke incidence and mortality separately. We aimed to investigate the relationship of total (red and processed meat), red (unprocessed or fresh red meat), and processed (processed red meat) consumption along with white meat on risk of stroke incidence and mortality. METHODS AND

resultsArticles were identified from databases and reference lists of relevant studies up to October 28, 2016. We selected prospective cohort studies on meat consumption specified by types of meat and stroke incidence and mortality reporting relative risks and 95% confidence intervals. The pooled relative risk was estimated using the random-effects model. Based on the inclusion criteria, 10 articles containing 15 studies (5 articles with 7 studies including 9522 cases of stroke incidence and 254 742 participants and 5 articles with 8 studies containing 12 999 cases of stroke mortality and 487 150 participants) were selected for quantitative synthesis. The pooled relative risks (95% confidence intervals) for total, red, processed and white meat consumption and total stroke incidence were 1.18 (1.09-1.28), 1.11 (1.03-1.20), 1.17 (1.08-1.25), and 0.87 (0.78-0.97), respectively. Total meat consumption (0.97 [0.85-1.11]) and red meat consumption 0.87 (0.64-1.18) were not significantly associated with stroke-related death.

conclusionsThe relationship between meat intake and risk of stroke may differ by type of meat. Recommendations for replacing proportions of red and processed meats to white meat for the prevention of stroke may be considered in clinical practice.

Indexed as

Food HandlingPoultry ProductsRed MeatAnimalsHumansIncidenceNutritive ValueOdds RatioProspective StudiesProtective FactorsRecommended Dietary AllowancesRisk AssessmentRisk FactorsStrokeTime Factorscerebrovascular accidentcerebrovascular infarctioncerebrovascular ischemiameat consumption

Identifiers

PMID28855166
PMCPMC5634267
OpenAlexW2751120050

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.