GLORIA

GEOMAR Library Ocean Research Information Access

Ihre E-Mail wurde erfolgreich gesendet. Bitte prüfen Sie Ihren Maileingang.

Leider ist ein Fehler beim E-Mail-Versand aufgetreten. Bitte versuchen Sie es erneut.

Vorgang fortführen?

Exportieren
Filter
  • Raeisi-Dehkordi, Hamidreza  (3)
  • Wehrli, Faina  (3)
  • Englisch  (3)
  • 2020-2024  (3)
Materialart
Sprache
  • Englisch  (3)
Erscheinungszeitraum
  • 2020-2024  (3)
Jahr
  • 1
    In: American Journal of Epidemiology, Oxford University Press (OUP), Vol. 191, No. 7 ( 2022-06-27), p. 1323-1335
    Kurzfassung: Consumption of ultra-processed foods (UPF) has increased worldwide during the last decades because they are hyperpalatable, cheap, and ready-to-consume products. However, uncertainty exists about their impact on health. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis evaluating the association of UPF consumption with all-cause mortality risk. Five bibliographic databases were searched for relevant studies. Random effects models were used to calculate pooled relative risks (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Of 6,951 unique citations, 40 unique prospective cohort studies comprising 5,750,133 individuals were included; publication dates ranged from 1984 to 2021. Compared with low consumption, highest consumption of UPF (RR = 1.29, 95% CI: 1.17, 1.42), sugar-sweetened beverages (RR = 1.11, 95% CI, 1.04, 1.18), artificially sweetened beverages (RR = 1.14, 95% CI, 1.05, 1.22), and processed meat/red meat (RR = 1.15, 95% CI, 1.10, 1.21) were significantly associated with increased risk of mortality. However, breakfast cereals were associated with a lower mortality risk (RR = 0.85, 95% CI, 0.79, 0.92). This meta-analysis suggests that high consumption of UPF, sugar-sweetened beverages, artificially sweetened beverages, processed meat, and processed red meat might increase all-cause mortality, while breakfast cereals might decrease it. Future studies are needed to address lack of standardized methods in UPF categorization.
    Materialart: Online-Ressource
    ISSN: 0002-9262 , 1476-6256
    Sprache: Englisch
    Verlag: Oxford University Press (OUP)
    Publikationsdatum: 2022
    ZDB Id: 2030043-8
    Standort Signatur Einschränkungen Verfügbarkeit
    BibTip Andere fanden auch interessant ...
  • 2
    In: European Journal of Epidemiology, Springer Science and Business Media LLC, Vol. 38, No. 4 ( 2023-04), p. 355-372
    Kurzfassung: Current evidence on COVID-19 prognostic models is inconsistent and clinical applicability remains controversial. We performed a systematic review to summarize and critically appraise the available studies that have developed, assessed and/or validated prognostic models of COVID-19 predicting health outcomes. We searched six bibliographic databases to identify published articles that investigated univariable and multivariable prognostic models predicting adverse outcomes in adult COVID-19 patients, including intensive care unit (ICU) admission, intubation, high-flow nasal therapy (HFNT), extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) and mortality. We identified and assessed 314 eligible articles from more than 40 countries, with 152 of these studies presenting mortality, 66 progression to severe or critical illness, 35 mortality and ICU admission combined, 17 ICU admission only, while the remaining 44 studies reported prediction models for mechanical ventilation (MV) or a combination of multiple outcomes. The sample size of included studies varied from 11 to 7,704,171 participants, with a mean age ranging from 18 to 93 years. There were 353 prognostic models investigated, with area under the curve (AUC) ranging from 0.44 to 0.99. A great proportion of studies (61.5%, 193 out of 314) performed internal or external validation or replication. In 312 (99.4%) studies, prognostic models were reported to be at high risk of bias due to uncertainties and challenges surrounding methodological rigor, sampling, handling of missing data, failure to deal with overfitting and heterogeneous definitions of COVID-19 and severity outcomes. While several clinical prognostic models for COVID-19 have been described in the literature, they are limited in generalizability and/or applicability due to deficiencies in addressing fundamental statistical and methodological concerns. Future large, multi-centric and well-designed prognostic prospective studies are needed to clarify remaining uncertainties.
    Materialart: Online-Ressource
    ISSN: 0393-2990 , 1573-7284
    Sprache: Englisch
    Verlag: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
    Publikationsdatum: 2023
    ZDB Id: 2004992-4
    Standort Signatur Einschränkungen Verfügbarkeit
    BibTip Andere fanden auch interessant ...
  • 3
    In: Journal of Personalized Medicine, MDPI AG, Vol. 12, No. 12 ( 2022-11-22), p. 1940-
    Kurzfassung: Buckwheat (BW) is suggested to have beneficial effects, but evidence on how it affects cardiometabolic health (CMH) is not yet established. We aimed to assess the effects of BW and/or its related bioactive compounds on cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk markers in adults. Five databases were searched for eligible studies. Observational prospective studies, nonrandomized or randomized trials were considered if they assessed BW, rutin or quercetin-3-glucoside intake and CVD risk markers. We adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines for reporting. We selected 16 human studies based on 831 subjects with mild metabolic disturbances, such as hypercholesterolemia, diabetes and/or overweight. Eight studies, investigating primarily grain components, were included in the meta-analyses (n = 464). High study heterogeneity was present across most of our analyses. Weighted mean difference (WMD) for subjects receiving BW supplementation, compared to controls, were − 0.14 mmol/L (95% CI: −0.30; 0.02) for total cholesterol (TC), −0.03 mmol/L (95% CI: −0.22; 0.16) for LDL cholesterol, −0.14 kg (95% CI: −1.50; 1.22) for body weight, −0.04 mmol/L (95% CI: − 0.09;0.02) for HDL cholesterol, −0.02 mmol/L (95% CI: −0.15; 0.11) for triglycerides and −0.18 mmol/L (95% CI: −0.36; 0.003) for glucose. Most of the studies (66.7%) had concerns of risk of bias. Studies investigating other CVD markers were scarce and with inconsistent findings, where available. Evidence on how BW affects CMH is limited. However, the available literature indicates that BW supplementation in mild dyslipidaemia and type 2 diabetes may provide some benefit in lowering TC and glucose, albeit non-significant. Our work highlights the need for more rigorous trials, with better methodological rigor to clarify remaining uncertainties on potential effects of BW on CMH and its utility in clinical nutrition practice.
    Materialart: Online-Ressource
    ISSN: 2075-4426
    Sprache: Englisch
    Verlag: MDPI AG
    Publikationsdatum: 2022
    ZDB Id: 2662248-8
    Standort Signatur Einschränkungen Verfügbarkeit
    BibTip Andere fanden auch interessant ...
Schließen ⊗
Diese Webseite nutzt Cookies und das Analyse-Tool Matomo. Weitere Informationen finden Sie hier...