Evidence mapPaperPMID 37049580Full record

SynthesisNutrients2023

Carbohydrate Intake and Risk of Cardiovascular Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Prospective Studies.

Unhui Jo, Kyong Park

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Nutrients, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
field-weighted citation impact
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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Observational
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
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

2 authors.

Unhui JoDepartment of Food and Nutrition, Yeungnam University, Gyeongsan 38541, Republic of Korea.
Kyong ParkDepartment of Food and Nutrition, Yeungnam University, Gyeongsan 38541, Republic of Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-4681-1584

Funding

National Research Foundation of Korea 2021R1A2C1007869
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to understand the conflicting results from previous studies on the association between carbohydrate intake and cardiovascular disease (CVD) by conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis to summarize the most recent scientific evidence. A systematic review used three electronic databases to gather literature on the association between carbohydrate intake and CVD. Considering the discrepancies, either fixed or random effect models were chosen to determine the effect size, and sensitivity analysis results, as well as publication bias, were also presented. The meta-analysis found that individuals with the highest carbohydrate intake had a 1.15-fold increased risk of CVD compared to those with the lowest intake (hazard ratio, HR: 1.15, 95% confidence interval, CI: 1.07-1.23). Further subgroup analysis revealed that this association was only present in Asia, with a 1.52-fold increased risk (HR: 1.52, 95% CI: 1.17-1.97), while no associations were seen in the Americas, Europe, and Oceania. The relationship between carbohydrate intake and CVD was non-linear, with a marked escalation beyond 60% of total energy from carbohydrates. Our findings suggest that a high-carbohydrate diet may raise the risk of CVD, particularly in Asian populations. This association may be due to the higher carbohydrate consumption and genetic variations found in Asia.

Indexed as

Cardiovascular DiseasesAsiaCarbohydratesEuropeHumansProspective StudiesRisk FactorsCarbohydratescarbohydratecardiovascular diseasecoronary heart diseasemeta-analysisstroke

Identifiers

PMID37049580
PMCPMC10096555

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.