Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

LIVE: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)
Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Systematic Reviews
Published in: Systematic Reviews 1/2016

Open Access 01-12-2016 | Protocol

Food groups and risk of chronic disease: a protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis of cohort studies

Authors: Lukas Schwingshackl, Anna Chaimani, Angela Bechthold, Khalid Iqbal, Marta Stelmach-Mardas, Georg Hoffmann, Carolina Schwedhelm, Sabrina Schlesinger, Heiner Boeing

Published in: Systematic Reviews | Issue 1/2016

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

There is a lack of systematic and comprehensive evaluations whether food intakes lower or increase risk of chronic diseases. In this network meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies, we aim to evaluate the effects of different foods on risk of chronic diseases.

Methods/design

We will search PubMed and EMBASE. This will be supplemented by a hand search and author contacts. Citations, abstracts, and relevant papers will be screened for eligibility by two reviewers independently. Prospective cohort studies will be included if they meet the following criteria: (1) evaluate the association of single food or food groups with all-cause mortality, cardiovascular diseases (incidence and mortality), cancer (incidence and mortality) or risk of type 2 diabetes. The following food groups will be evaluated: whole grains, refined grains, vegetables, fruits, nuts, legumes, eggs, dairy products, fish, red meat, processed meat and sugar-sweetened beverages; (2) include participants ≥18 years of age; and (3) study population were free of outcome(s) of interest at the onset of the study. To assess study quality, we will extract the following characteristics: study size, duration of follow-up, dietary assessment method, assessment of outcome and adjustment factors. If the identified studies appear sufficiently similar within and across the different comparisons between pairs of food groups, we will estimate summary-relative effects using random effects network meta-analysis. Subgroup and meta-regression analyses will be performed stratified by different follow-up cut-points, geographical region and sex.

Discussion

This is a presentation of the study protocol only. Results and conclusions are pending completion of this study. Our systematic review will be of great value to national and international authorities for evidence-based nutritional recommendation/guidelines, regarding the implementation of food-based dietary guidelines for prevention of chronic diseases. Moreover, our results can be implemented to develop new diet quality indices/scores.

Systematic review registration

Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
GBD 2013 Mortality and Causes of Death Collaborators. Global, regional, and national age-sex specific all-cause and cause-specific mortality for 240 causes of death, 1990–2013: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2013. Lancet. 2015;385(9963):117–171.
2.
Howard BV, Manson JE, Stefanick ML, Beresford SA, Frank G, Jones B, Rodabough RJ, Snetselaar L, Thomson C, Tinker L, et al. Low-fat dietary pattern and weight change over 7 years: the Women’s Health Initiative Dietary Modification Trial. JAMA. 2006;295(1):39–49.CrossRefPubMed
3.
Estruch R, Ros E, Salas-Salvado J, Covas MI, Corella D, Aros F, Gomez-Gracia E, Ruiz-Gutierrez V, Fiol M, Lapetra J, et al. Primary prevention of cardiovascular disease with a Mediterranean diet. N Engl J Med. 2013;368(14):1279–90.CrossRefPubMed
4.
de Lorgeril M, Renaud S, Mamelle N, Salen P, Martin JL, Monjaud I, Guidollet J, Touboul P, Delaye J. Mediterranean alpha-linolenic acid-rich diet in secondary prevention of coronary heart disease. Lancet. 1994;343(8911):1454–9.CrossRefPubMed
5.
6.
Ford ES, Bergmann MM, Kroger J, Schienkiewitz A, Weikert C, Boeing H. Healthy living is the best revenge: findings from the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition-Potsdam study. Arch Intern Med. 2009;169(15):1355–62.CrossRefPubMed
7.
Lim SS, Vos T, Flaxman AD, Danaei G, Shibuya K, Adair-Rohani H, Amann M, Anderson HR, Andrews KG, Aryee M, et al. A comparative risk assessment of burden of disease and injury attributable to 67 risk factors and risk factor clusters in 21 regions, 1990-2010: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2010. Lancet. 2012;380(9859):2224–60.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
8.
Mente A, de Koning L, Shannon HS, Anand SS. A systematic review of the evidence supporting a causal link between dietary factors and coronary heart disease. Arch Intern Med. 2009;169(7):659–69.CrossRefPubMed
9.
Anand SS, Hawkes C, de Souza RJ, Mente A, Dehghan M, Nugent R, Zulyniak MA, Weis T, Bernstein AM, Krauss RM, et al. Food consumption and its impact on cardiovascular disease: importance of solutions focused on the globalized food system: a report from the workshop convened by the world heart federation. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2015;66(14):1590–614.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
10.
Fardet A, Boirie Y. Associations between food and beverage groups and major diet-related chronic diseases: an exhaustive review of pooled/meta-analyses and systematic reviews. Nutr Rev. 2014;72(12):741–62.CrossRefPubMed
11.
Moher D, Shamseer L, Clarke M, Ghersi D, Liberati A, Petticrew M, Shekelle P, Stewart LA, Group P-P. Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. Syst Rev. 2015;4(1):1.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
12.
Shamseer L, Moher D, Clarke M, Ghersi D, Liberati AD, Petticrew M, Shekelle P, Stewart LA, the P-PG. Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015: elaboration and explanation. BMJ. 2015;349:g7647.CrossRefPubMed
13.
Hutton B, Salanti G, Caldwell DM, Chaimani A, Schmid CH, Cameron C, Ioannidis JP, Straus S, Thorlund K, Jansen JP, et al. The PRISMA extension statement for reporting of systematic reviews incorporating network meta-analyses of health care interventions: checklist and explanations. Ann Intern Med. 2015;162(11):777–84.CrossRefPubMed
14.
15.
Schwingshackl L, Hoffmann G. Adherence to Mediterranean diet and risk of cancer: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies. Cancer Med. 2015;4(12):1933–1947.
16.
Schwingshackl L, Hoffmann G. Diet quality as assessed by the healthy eating index, the alternate healthy eating index, the dietary approaches to stop hypertension score, and health outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis of cohort studies. J Acad Nutr Diet. 2015;115(5):780–800. e785.CrossRefPubMed
17.
Schwingshackl L, Missbach B, Konig J, Hoffmann G. Adherence to a Mediterranean diet and risk of diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Public Health Nutr. 2015;18(7):1292–9.CrossRefPubMed
18.
Schwingshackl L, Hoffmann G. Adherence to Mediterranean diet and risk of cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies. Int J Cancer. 2014;135(8):1884–97.CrossRefPubMed
19.
Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, Mulrow C, Gotzsche PC, Ioannidis JP, Clarke M, Devereaux PJ, Kleijnen J, Moher D. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate healthcare interventions: explanation and elaboration. BMJ. 2009;339:b2700.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
20.
Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med. 2009;6(7):e1000097.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
21.
Schwingshackl L, Knüppel S, Schwedhelm C, Hoffmann G, Missbach B, Stelmach-Mardas M, Dietrich S, Eichelmann F, Kontopanteils E, Iqbal K, et al. NutriGrade: a scoring system to assess and judge the meta-evidence of randomized controlled trials and cohort studies in nutrition research. Adv Nutr. 2016.
22.
Schwingshackl L, Hoffmann G, Kalle-Uhlmann T, Arregui M, Buijsse B, Boeing H. Fruit and vegetable consumption and changes in anthropometric variables in adult populations: a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies. PLoS One. 2015;10(10):e0140846.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
23.
24.
25.
Greenland S, Longnecker MP. Methods for trend estimation from summarized dose-response data, with applications to meta-analysis. Am J Epidemiol. 1992;135(11):1301–9.CrossRefPubMed
26.
Orsini N, Bellocco R, Greenland S. Generalized least squares for trend estimation of summarized dose-response data. Stata J. 2006;6(1):40–57.
27.
Chene G, Thompson SG. Methods for summarizing the risk associations of quantitative variables in epidemiologic studies in a consistent form. Am J Epidemiol. 1996;144(6):610–21.CrossRefPubMed
28.
Aune D, Greenwood DC, Chan DS, Vieira R, Vieira AR, Navarro Rosenblatt DA, Cade JE, Burley VJ, Norat T. Body mass index, abdominal fatness and pancreatic cancer risk: a systematic review and non-linear dose-response meta-analysis of prospective studies. Ann Oncol. 2012;23(4):843–52.CrossRefPubMed
29.
30.
Higgins JP, Thompson SG. Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis. Stat Med. 2002;21(11):1539–58.CrossRefPubMed
31.
Salanti G, Ades AE, Ioannidis JP. Graphical methods and numerical summaries for presenting results from multiple-treatment meta-analysis: an overview and tutorial. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011;64(2):163–71.CrossRefPubMed
32.
Riley RD, Higgins JP, Deeks JJ. Interpretation of random effects meta-analyses. BMJ. 2011;342:d549.CrossRefPubMed
33.
Salanti G, Del Giovane C, Chaimani A, Caldwell DM, Higgins JP. Evaluating the quality of evidence from a network meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2014;9(7):e99682.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
34.
Bucher HC, Guyatt GH, Griffith LE, Walter SD. The results of direct and indirect treatment comparisons in meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Clin Epidemiol. 1997;50(6):683–91.CrossRefPubMed
35.
Dias S, Welton NJ, Caldwell DM, Ades AE. Checking consistency in mixed treatment comparison meta-analysis. Stat Med. 2010;29(7-8):932–44.CrossRefPubMed
36.
Higgins JP, Jackson D, Barrett JK, Lu G, Ades AE, White IR. Consistency and inconsistency in network meta-analysis: concepts and models for multi-arm studies. Res Synth Methods. 2012;3(2):98–110.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
37.
Jackson D, Barrett JK, Rice S, White IR, Higgins JP. A design-by-treatment interaction model for network meta-analysis with random inconsistency effects. Stat Med. 2014;33(21):3639–54.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
38.
Peters JL, Sutton AJ, Jones DR, Abrams KR, Rushton L. Contour-enhanced meta-analysis funnel plots help distinguish publication bias from other causes of asymmetry. J Clin Epidemiol. 2008;61(10):991–6.CrossRefPubMed
39.
Chaimani A, Salanti G. Using network meta-analysis to evaluate the existence of small-study effects in a network of interventions. Res Synth Methods. 2012;3(2):161–76.CrossRefPubMed
40.
StataCorp. Stata Statistical Software: Release 14. College Station: StataCorp LP; 2015.
41.
White IR. Network meta-analysis. Stata J. 2015;15(4):951–985.
42.
Chaimani, Salanti. Visualizing assumptions and results in network meta-analysis: the network graphs package. Stata J. 2015;15(4):905-950.
Metadata
Title
Food groups and risk of chronic disease: a protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis of cohort studies
Authors
Lukas Schwingshackl
Anna Chaimani
Angela Bechthold
Khalid Iqbal
Marta Stelmach-Mardas
Georg Hoffmann
Carolina Schwedhelm
Sabrina Schlesinger
Heiner Boeing
Publication date
01-12-2016
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Systematic Reviews / Issue 1/2016
Electronic ISSN: 2046-4053
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-016-0302-9

Other articles of this Issue 1/2016

Systematic Reviews 1/2016 Go to the issue

Research

Meta-analysis, complexity, and heterogeneity: a qualitative interview study of researchers’ methodological values and practices

Protocol

What approaches to social prescribing work, for whom, and in what circumstances? A protocol for a realist review

Research

Use of existing systematic reviews for evidence assessments in infectious disease prevention: a comparative case study

Protocol

Appraisal of clinical practice guidelines for management of paediatric type 2 diabetes mellitus using the AGREE II instrument: a systematic review protocol

Protocol

The range of peripapillary retinal nerve fibre layer and optic disc parameters in children aged up to but not including 18 years of age, as measured by optical coherence tomography: protocol for a systematic review

Protocol

Discharge interventions for older patients leaving hospital: protocol for a systematic meta-review