Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30684032›Full record

SynthesisEuropean journal of nutrition2020

Magnesium and health outcomes: an umbrella review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of observational and intervention studies.

Nicola Veronese, Jacopo Demurtas, Gabriella Pesolillo, Stefano Celotto, Tommaso Barnini, Giovanni Calusi, Maria Gabriella Caruso, Maria Notarnicola, Rosa Reddavide, Brendon Stubbs and 8 more

Open access · greenAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in European journal of nutrition, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 52 papers, 8 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
52citing papers in PubMed, 8 pooled it
7.8field-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

52 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 102 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. Association betweenBMJ open · 2020
    Pooled it
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Magnesium: Hype and Health Benefits.Current nutrition reports · 2026
    Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

18 authors at 8 institutions in 4 countries.

Nicola VeroneseNational Research Council, Neuroscience Institute, Aging Branch, Via Giustiniani, 2, 35128, Padova, Italy. ilmannato@gmail.com.
Jacopo DemurtasPrimary Care Department, Azienda USL Toscana Sud Est, Grosseto, Italy.
Gabriella PesolilloPrimary Care Service, ASL 02, Chieti, Italy.
Stefano CelottoPrimary Care Department, Azienda per l'Assistenza Sanitaria 3 Alto Friuli -Collinare -Medio Friuli, Udine, Italy.
Tommaso BarniniPrimary Care Service, AUSL Toscana Centro, Firenze, Italy.
Giovanni CalusiPrimary Care Department, Azienda USL Toscana Centro, Prato, Italy.
Maria Gabriella CarusoResearch Hospital, National Institute of Gastroenterlogy, IRCCS De Bellis, Castellana Grotte, BA, Italy.
Maria NotarnicolaResearch Hospital, National Institute of Gastroenterlogy, IRCCS De Bellis, Castellana Grotte, BA, Italy.
Rosa ReddavideResearch Hospital, National Institute of Gastroenterlogy, IRCCS De Bellis, Castellana Grotte, BA, Italy.
Brendon StubbsPhysiotherapy Department, South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust, Denmark Hill, SE5 8AZ, London, UK.
Marco SolmiNeuroscience Department, University of Padova, Padova, Italy.
Stefania MaggiNational Research Council, Neuroscience Institute, Aging Branch, Via Giustiniani, 2, 35128, Padova, Italy.
Alberto VaonaPrimary Care Department, Azienda ULSS20 Verona, Verona, Italy.
Joseph FirthNICM Health Research Institute, University of Western Sydney, Penrith, Australia.
Lee SmithThe Cambridge Centre for Sport and Exercise Sciences, Department of Life Sciences, Anglia Ruskin University, Cambridge, UK.
Ai KoyanagiInstituto de Salud Carlos III, Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Salud Mental, CIBERSAM, Monforte de Lemos 3-5 Pabellón 11, 28029, Madrid, Spain.
Ligia DominguezGeriatric Unit, Department of Internal Medicine and Geriatrics, University of Palermo, Palermo, Italy.
Mario BarbagalloGeriatric Unit, Department of Internal Medicine and Geriatrics, University of Palermo, Palermo, Italy.
Azienda Usl Toscana Centro · ITGastroenterology Hospital "Saverio de Bellis" · ITAnglia Ruskin University · GBNeuroscience Institute · ITUniversity of Palermo · ITCentro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Salud Mental · ESUniversity of Padua · ITWestern Sydney University · AU

Funding

Department of Health ICA-CL-2017-03-001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo map and grade all health outcomes associated with magnesium (Mg) intake and supplementation using an umbrella review.

methodsUmbrella review of systematic reviews with meta-analyses of observational studies and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) using placebo/no intervention as control group. We assessed meta-analyses of observational studies based on random-effect summary effect sizes and their p values, 95% prediction intervals, heterogeneity, small-study effects and excess significance. For meta-analyses of RCTs, outcomes with a random-effect p value < 0.005 and a high-GRADE assessment were classified as strong evidence.

resultsFrom 2048 abstracts, 16 meta-analyses and 55 independent outcomes were included (36 in RCTs and 19 in observational studies). In RCTs of Mg versus placebo/no active treatment, 12 over 36 outcomes reported significant results (p < 0.05). A strong evidence for decreased need for hospitalization in pregnancy and for decreased risk of frequency and intensity of migraine relapses in people with migraine was observed using the GRADE assessment. In observational studies, 9/19 outcomes were significant (p < 0.05). However, only one outcome presented highly suggestive evidence (lower incidence of type 2 diabetes in people with higher Mg intake at baseline) and one suggestive (lower incidence of stroke associated with higher Mg intake at baseline).

conclusionStrong evidence according to the GRADE suggests that Mg supplementation can decrease the risk of hospitalization in pregnant women and reduce the intensity/frequency of migraine. Higher Mg intake is associated with a decreased risk of type 2 diabetes and stroke with highly suggestive and suggestive evidence, respectively, in observational studies.

Indexed as

Dietary SupplementsHealth StatusHumansMagnesiumObservational Studies as TopicMagnesiumDiabetesMagnesiumMeta-analysisPregnancyStrokeUmbrella review

Identifiers

PMID30684032
OpenAlexW2914502553

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
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.