The Parker Institute, Bispebjerg and Frederiksberg Hospital, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Department of Pharmacy, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
PLoS One. 2019 Oct 17;14(10):e0223883. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0223883. eCollection 2019.
Despite the nutritional value of meat, a large volume of reviews and meta-analyses suggests that processed meat intake is associated with an increased risk of chronic diseases. However, assessments of the quality of these published reviews internal validity are generally lacking. We systematically reviewed and assessed the quality alongside summarizing the results of previously published systematic reviews and meta-analyses that examined the association between processed meat intake and cancers, type II diabetes (T2D), and cardiovascular diseases (CVD). Reviews and meta-analyses published until May 2018 were identified through a systematic literature search in the databases MEDLINE and EMBASE, and reference lists of included reviews. The quality of the systematic reviews and meta-analyses was assessed using A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR). All eligible reviews had to comply with two quality requirements: providing sufficient information on quality assessment of the primary studies and a comprehensive search. The results were summarized for T2D, CVD, and each of the different cancer types. The certainty in the estimates of the individual outcomes was rated using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) method. In total, 22 systematic reviews were eligible and thus included in this review. More than 100 reviews were excluded because quality assessment of the primary studies had not been performed. The AMSTAR score of the included reviews ranged from 5 to 8 indicating moderate quality. Overall, the quality assessments of primary studies of the reviews are generally lacking; the scientific quality of the systematic reviews reporting positive associations between processed meat intake and risk of various cancers, T2D and CVD is moderate, and the results from case-control studies suggest more often a positive association than the results from cohort studies. The overall certainty in the evidence was very low across all individual outcomes, due to serious risk of bias and imprecision.
尽管肉类具有营养价值,但大量的综述和荟萃分析表明,加工肉类的摄入与慢性病风险的增加有关。然而,对这些已发表综述的内部有效性的质量评估通常是缺乏的。我们系统地回顾和评估了质量,并总结了以前发表的系统综述和荟萃分析的结果,这些研究考察了加工肉类摄入与癌症、2 型糖尿病(T2D)和心血管疾病(CVD)之间的关联。通过在 MEDLINE 和 EMBASE 数据库以及纳入综述的参考文献列表中进行系统文献检索,确定了截至 2018 年 5 月发表的综述和荟萃分析。使用评估系统评价的测量工具(AMSTAR)评估系统综述和荟萃分析的质量。所有合格的综述都必须符合两个质量要求:提供足够的关于初级研究质量评估的信息和全面的搜索。结果按 T2D、CVD 和每种不同癌症类型进行了总结。使用推荐评估、发展和评估(GRADE)方法对个体结果的估计确定性进行了评级。共有 22 篇系统综述符合条件并因此纳入本综述。由于没有对初级研究进行质量评估,因此排除了 100 多篇综述。纳入综述的 AMSTAR 评分范围为 5 至 8,表明质量为中等。总体而言,综述中对初级研究的质量评估普遍缺乏;报告加工肉类摄入与各种癌症、T2D 和 CVD 风险之间存在正相关关系的系统综述的科学质量为中等,并且来自病例对照研究的结果比来自队列研究的结果更常提示存在正相关关系。由于严重的偏倚和不精确性,所有个体结果的证据总体确定性都非常低。