-
Nutrition, Metabolism, and... May 2021To systematically evaluate the evidence regarding the effects of foods on LDL cholesterol levels and to compare the findings with current guidelines. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
AIMS
To systematically evaluate the evidence regarding the effects of foods on LDL cholesterol levels and to compare the findings with current guidelines.
DATA SYNTHESIS
From inception through June 2019, we searched PubMed, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for guidelines, systematic reviews, and RCTs (for coffee intake only) of at least 13 days duration. Additionally, we searched Trip database for guidelines from 2009 through Oct 2019. Language was restricted to English. The strength of evidence was evaluated using The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE). A total of 37 guidelines, 108 systematic reviews, and 20 RCTs were included. With high evidence, foods high in unsaturated and low in saturated and trans fatty acids (e.g. rapeseed/canola oil), with added plant sterols/stanols, and high in soluble fiber (e.g. oats, barley, and psyllium) caused at least moderate (i.e. 0.20-0.40 mmol/L) reductions in LDL cholesterol. Unfiltered coffee caused a moderate to large increase. Soy protein, tomatoes, flaxseeds, and almonds caused small reductions. With moderate evidence, avocados and turmeric caused moderate to large reductions. Pulses, hazelnuts, walnuts, high-fiber/wholegrain foods, and green tea caused small to moderate reductions, whereas sugar caused a small increase. Other identified foods were either neutral or had low or very low evidence regarding their effects.
CONCLUSIONS
Several foods distinctly modify LDL cholesterol levels. The results may aid future guidelines and dietary advice for hypercholesterolemia.
Topics: Adult; Biomarkers; Cholesterol, LDL; Diet; Diet, Healthy; Down-Regulation; Female; Humans; Hypercholesterolemia; Male; Middle Aged; Nutritive Value; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Risk Assessment; Risk Factors; Risk Reduction Behavior; Treatment Outcome; Young Adult
PubMed: 33762150
DOI: 10.1016/j.numecd.2020.12.032 -
BMC Complementary Medicine and Therapies Jun 2021Elevated lipid profiles and impaired glucose homeostasis are risk factors for several cardiovascular diseases (CVDs), which, subsequently, represent a leading cause of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Elevated lipid profiles and impaired glucose homeostasis are risk factors for several cardiovascular diseases (CVDs), which, subsequently, represent a leading cause of early mortality, worldwide. The aim of the current study was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of the effect of apple cider vinegar (ACV) on lipid profiles and glycemic parameters in adults.
METHODS
A systematic search was conducted in electronic databases, including Medline, Scopus, Cochrane Library, and Web of Knowledge, from database inception to January 2020. All clinical trials which investigated the effect of ACV on lipid profiles and glycemic indicators were included. Studies were excluded if ACV was used in combination with other interventions or when the duration of intervention was < 2 weeks. To account for between-study heterogeneity, we performed meta-analysis using a random-effects model.
RESULTS
Overall, nine studies, including 10 study arms, were included in this meta-analysis. We found that ACV consumption significantly decreased serum total cholesterol (- 6.06 mg/dL; 95% CI: - 10.95, - 1.17; I: 39%), fasting plasma glucose (- 7.97 mg/dL; 95% CI: - 13.74, - 2.21; I: 75%), and HbA1C concentrations (- 0.50; 95% CI: - 0.90, - 0.09; I: 91%). No significant effect of ACV consumption was found on serum LDL-C, HDL-C, fasting insulin concentrations, or HOMA-IR. The stratified analysis revealed a significant reduction of serum TC and TG in a subgroup of patients with type 2 diabetes, those who took ≤15 mL/day of ACV, and those who consumed ACV for > 8-weeks, respectively. Furthermore, ACV consumption significantly decreased FPG levels in a subgroup of studies that administered ACV for > 8-weeks. Further, ACV intake appeared to elicit an increase in FPG and HDL-C concentrations in apparently healthy participants.
CONCLUSION
We found a significant favorable effect of ACV consumption on FPG and blood lipid levels.
Topics: Acetic Acid; Blood Glucose; Cholesterol; Cholesterol, HDL; Cholesterol, LDL; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Glycated Hemoglobin; Humans; Insulin; Malus; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 34187442
DOI: 10.1186/s12906-021-03351-w -
BMJ (Clinical Research Ed.) Apr 2020To determine the relative effectiveness of dietary macronutrient patterns and popular named diet programmes for weight loss and cardiovascular risk factor improvement... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Comparison of dietary macronutrient patterns of 14 popular named dietary programmes for weight and cardiovascular risk factor reduction in adults: systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised trials.
OBJECTIVE
To determine the relative effectiveness of dietary macronutrient patterns and popular named diet programmes for weight loss and cardiovascular risk factor improvement among adults who are overweight or obese.
DESIGN
Systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised trials.
DATA SOURCES
Medline, Embase, CINAHL, AMED, and CENTRAL from database inception until September 2018, reference lists of eligible trials, and related reviews.
STUDY SELECTION
Randomised trials that enrolled adults (≥18 years) who were overweight (body mass index 25-29) or obese (≥30) to a popular named diet or an alternative diet.
OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
Change in body weight, low density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol, high density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol, systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, and C reactive protein at the six and 12 month follow-up.
REVIEW METHODS
Two reviewers independently extracted data on study participants, interventions, and outcomes and assessed risk of bias, and the certainty of evidence using the GRADE (grading of recommendations, assessment, development, and evaluation) approach. A bayesian framework informed a series of random effects network meta-analyses to estimate the relative effectiveness of the diets.
RESULTS
121 eligible trials with 21 942 patients were included and reported on 14 named diets and three control diets. Compared with usual diet, low carbohydrate and low fat diets had a similar effect at six months on weight loss (4.63 4.37 kg, both moderate certainty) and reduction in systolic blood pressure (5.14 mm Hg, moderate certainty 5.05 mm Hg, low certainty) and diastolic blood pressure (3.21 2.85 mm Hg, both low certainty). Moderate macronutrient diets resulted in slightly less weight loss and blood pressure reductions. Low carbohydrate diets had less effect than low fat diets and moderate macronutrient diets on reduction in LDL cholesterol (1.01 mg/dL, low certainty 7.08 mg/dL, moderate certainty 5.22 mg/dL, moderate certainty, respectively) but an increase in HDL cholesterol (2.31 mg/dL, low certainty), whereas low fat (-1.88 mg/dL, moderate certainty) and moderate macronutrient (-0.89 mg/dL, moderate certainty) did not. Among popular named diets, those with the largest effect on weight reduction and blood pressure in comparison with usual diet were Atkins (weight 5.5 kg, systolic blood pressure 5.1 mm Hg, diastolic blood pressure 3.3 mm Hg), DASH (3.6 kg, 4.7 mm Hg, 2.9 mm Hg, respectively), and Zone (4.1 kg, 3.5 mm Hg, 2.3 mm Hg, respectively) at six months (all moderate certainty). No diets significantly improved levels of HDL cholesterol or C reactive protein at six months. Overall, weight loss diminished at 12 months among all macronutrient patterns and popular named diets, while the benefits for cardiovascular risk factors of all interventions, except the Mediterranean diet, essentially disappeared.
CONCLUSIONS
Moderate certainty evidence shows that most macronutrient diets, over six months, result in modest weight loss and substantial improvements in cardiovascular risk factors, particularly blood pressure. At 12 months the effects on weight reduction and improvements in cardiovascular risk factors largely disappear.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
PROSPERO CRD42015027929.
Topics: Blood Pressure; Body Mass Index; Body Weight; Cardiovascular Diseases; Cholesterol, HDL; Cholesterol, LDL; Diet, Carbohydrate-Restricted; Diet, Fat-Restricted; Diet, Mediterranean; Humans; Network Meta-Analysis; Nutrients; Obesity; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Risk Reduction Behavior; Weight Loss
PubMed: 32238384
DOI: 10.1136/bmj.m696 -
BMJ (Clinical Research Ed.) Aug 2019To investigate whether vitamin D supplementation is associated with lower mortality in adults. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
To investigate whether vitamin D supplementation is associated with lower mortality in adults.
DESIGN
Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.
DATA SOURCES
Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register from their inception to 26 December 2018.
ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES
Randomised controlled trials comparing vitamin D supplementation with a placebo or no treatment for mortality were included. Independent data extraction was conducted and study quality assessed. A meta-analysis was carried out by using fixed effects and random effects models to calculate risk ratio of death in the group receiving vitamin D supplementation and the control group.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES
All cause mortality.
RESULTS
52 trials with a total of 75 454 participants were identified. Vitamin D supplementation was not associated with all cause mortality (risk ratio 0.98, 95% confidence interval 0.95 to 1.02, I=0%), cardiovascular mortality (0.98, 0.88 to 1.08, 0%), or non-cancer, non-cardiovascular mortality (1.05, 0.93 to 1.18, 0%). Vitamin D supplementation statistically significantly reduced the risk of cancer death (0.84, 0.74 to 0.95, 0%). In subgroup analyses, all cause mortality was significantly lower in trials with vitamin D supplementation than in trials with vitamin D supplementation (P for interaction=0.04); neither vitamin D nor vitamin D was associated with a statistically significant reduction in all cause mortality.
CONCLUSIONS
Vitamin D supplementation alone was not associated with all cause mortality in adults compared with placebo or no treatment. Vitamin D supplementation reduced the risk of cancer death by 16%. Additional large clinical studies are needed to determine whether vitamin D supplementation is associated with lower all cause mortality.
STUDY REGISTRATION
PROSPERO registration number CRD42018117823.
Topics: Cholecalciferol; Dietary Supplements; Ergocalciferols; Humans; Mortality; Neoplasms; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Vitamin D
PubMed: 31405892
DOI: 10.1136/bmj.l4673 -
International Journal of Environmental... Jul 2022Numerous studies have demonstrated that abnormal levels of cholesterol are associated with a high attributable risk for the occurrence of cardiovascular disease (CVD).... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
INTRODUCTION
Numerous studies have demonstrated that abnormal levels of cholesterol are associated with a high attributable risk for the occurrence of cardiovascular disease (CVD). However, there has been no comprehensive study to investigate the relationship between serum cholesterol levels and cardiovascular mortality. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis.
METHODS
A systematic literature search of key databases, including EMBASE and MEDLINE, was conducted and included all the published epidemiological studies that contained estimates of the hazard ratios (HR) of serum cholesterol of CVD mortality. Data extraction, eligibility, and assessment of the risk of bias were assessed by two reviewers independently. All published risk estimates were hazard ratios and analyzed by quantitative meta-analysis using a random-effects model and dose-response relationships of serum cholesterol with CVD mortality.
RESULTS
A total of 14 independent reports, including 1,055,309 subjects and 9457 events, were analyzed. The pooled HR (95% CI) was 1.27 (95% CI, 1.19-1.36) for total cholesterol, 1.21 (95% CI, 1.09-1.35) for low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), and 0.60 (95% CI, 0.50-0.72) for high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C). We observed a linear association between serum cholesterol (TC, HDL-C) levels and CVD mortality in this meta-analysis.
CONCLUSIONS
Serum total cholesterol and LDL-C level is associated with increased CVD mortality, but HDL-C level is inversely associated with CVD mortality.
Topics: Cardiovascular Diseases; Cholesterol; Cholesterol, HDL; Cholesterol, LDL; Humans; Prospective Studies; Risk Factors; Triglycerides
PubMed: 35886124
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph19148272 -
JAMA Network Open Dec 2019Vitamin D and calcium supplements are recommended for the prevention of fracture, but previous randomized clinical trials (RCTs) have reported conflicting results, with... (Review)
Review Meta-Analysis
IMPORTANCE
Vitamin D and calcium supplements are recommended for the prevention of fracture, but previous randomized clinical trials (RCTs) have reported conflicting results, with uncertainty about optimal doses and regimens for supplementation and their overall effectiveness.
OBJECTIVE
To assess the risks of fracture associated with differences in concentrations of 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25[OH]D) in observational studies and the risks of fracture associated with supplementation with vitamin D alone or in combination with calcium in RCTs.
DATA SOURCES
PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and other RCT databases were searched from database inception until December 31, 2018. Searches were performed between July 2018 and December 2018.
STUDY SELECTION
Observational studies involving at least 200 fracture cases and RCTs enrolling at least 500 participants and reporting at least 10 incident fractures were included. Randomized clinical trials compared vitamin D or vitamin D and calcium with control.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
Two researchers independently extracted data according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines and assessed possible bias. Rate ratios (RRs) were estimated using fixed-effects meta-analysis. Data extraction and synthesis took place between July 2018 and June 2019.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
Any fracture and hip fracture.
RESULTS
In a meta-analysis of 11 observational studies (39 141 participants, 6278 fractures, 2367 hip fractures), each increase of 10.0 ng/mL (ie, 25 nmol/L) in 25 (OH)D concentration was associated with an adjusted RR for any fracture of 0.93 (95% CI, 0.89-0.96) and an adjusted RR for hip fracture of 0.80 (95% CI, 0.75-0.86). A meta-analysis of 11 RCTs (34 243 participants, 2843 fractures, 740 hip fractures) of vitamin D supplementation alone (daily or intermittent dose of 400-30 000 IU, yielding a median difference in 25[OH]D concentration of 8.4 ng/mL) did not find a reduced risk of any fracture (RR, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.98-1.14) or hip fracture (RR, 1.14; 95% CI, 0.98-1.32), but these trials were constrained by infrequent intermittent dosing, low daily doses of vitamin D, or an inadequate number of participants. In contrast, a meta-analysis of 6 RCTs (49 282 participants, 5449 fractures, 730 hip fractures) of combined supplementation with vitamin D (daily doses of 400-800 IU, yielding a median difference in 25[OH]D concentration of 9.2 ng/mL) and calcium (daily doses of 1000-1200 mg) found a 6% reduced risk of any fracture (RR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.89-0.99) and a 16% reduced risk of hip fracture (RR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.72-0.97).
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
In this systematic review and meta-analysis, neither intermittent nor daily dosing with standard doses of vitamin D alone was associated with reduced risk of fracture, but daily supplementation with both vitamin D and calcium was a more promising strategy.
Topics: Bone Density Conservation Agents; Bone and Bones; Calcitriol; Dietary Supplements; Fractures, Bone; Hip Fractures; Humans; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Vitamin D
PubMed: 31860103
DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.17789 -
The American Journal of Clinical... Jun 2012Currently, there is a lack of clarity in the literature as to whether there is a definitive difference between the effects of vitamins D2 and D3 in the raising of serum... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Currently, there is a lack of clarity in the literature as to whether there is a definitive difference between the effects of vitamins D2 and D3 in the raising of serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D].
OBJECTIVE
The objective of this article was to report a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that have directly compared the effects of vitamin D2 and vitamin D3 on serum 25(OH)D concentrations in humans.
DESIGN
The ISI Web of Knowledge (January 1966 to July 2011) database was searched electronically for all relevant studies in adults that directly compared vitamin D3 with vitamin D2. The Cochrane Clinical Trials Registry, International Standard Randomized Controlled Trials Number register, and clinicaltrials.gov were also searched for any unpublished trials.
RESULTS
A meta-analysis of RCTs indicated that supplementation with vitamin D3 had a significant and positive effect in the raising of serum 25(OH)D concentrations compared with the effect of vitamin D2 (P = 0.001). When the frequency of dosage administration was compared, there was a significant response for vitamin D3 when given as a bolus dose (P = 0.0002) compared with administration of vitamin D2, but the effect was lost with daily supplementation.
CONCLUSIONS
This meta-analysis indicates that vitamin D3 is more efficacious at raising serum 25(OH)D concentrations than is vitamin D2, and thus vitamin D3) could potentially become the preferred choice for supplementation. However, additional research is required to examine the metabolic pathways involved in oral and intramuscular administration of vitamin D and the effects across age, sex, and ethnicity, which this review was unable to verify.
Topics: Cholecalciferol; Dietary Supplements; Drug Administration Schedule; Ergocalciferols; Humans; Vitamin D; Vitamin D Deficiency; Vitamins
PubMed: 22552031
DOI: 10.3945/ajcn.111.031070 -
JAMA Internal Medicine May 2022The association between statin-induced reduction in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels and the absolute risk reduction of individual, rather than... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Evaluating the Association Between Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol Reduction and Relative and Absolute Effects of Statin Treatment: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
IMPORTANCE
The association between statin-induced reduction in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels and the absolute risk reduction of individual, rather than composite, outcomes, such as all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, or stroke, is unclear.
OBJECTIVE
To assess the association between absolute reductions in LDL-C levels with treatment with statin therapy and all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, and stroke to facilitate shared decision-making between clinicians and patients and inform clinical guidelines and policy.
DATA SOURCES
PubMed and Embase were searched to identify eligible trials from January 1987 to June 2021.
STUDY SELECTION
Large randomized clinical trials that examined the effectiveness of statins in reducing total mortality and cardiovascular outcomes with a planned duration of 2 or more years and that reported absolute changes in LDL-C levels. Interventions were treatment with statins (3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A reductase inhibitors) vs placebo or usual care. Participants were men and women older than 18 years.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
Three independent reviewers extracted data and/or assessed the methodological quality and certainty of the evidence using the risk of bias 2 tool and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation. Any differences in opinion were resolved by consensus. Meta-analyses and a meta-regression were undertaken.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
Primary outcome: all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes: myocardial infarction, stroke.
FINDINGS
Twenty-one trials were included in the analysis. Meta-analyses showed reductions in the absolute risk of 0.8% (95% CI, 0.4%-1.2%) for all-cause mortality, 1.3% (95% CI, 0.9%-1.7%) for myocardial infarction, and 0.4% (95% CI, 0.2%-0.6%) for stroke in those randomized to treatment with statins, with associated relative risk reductions of 9% (95% CI, 5%-14%), 29% (95% CI, 22%-34%), and 14% (95% CI, 5%-22%) respectively. A meta-regression exploring the potential mediating association of the magnitude of statin-induced LDL-C reduction with outcomes was inconclusive.
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
The results of this meta-analysis suggest that the absolute risk reductions of treatment with statins in terms of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, and stroke are modest compared with the relative risk reductions, and the presence of significant heterogeneity reduces the certainty of the evidence. A conclusive association between absolute reductions in LDL-C levels and individual clinical outcomes was not established, and these findings underscore the importance of discussing absolute risk reductions when making informed clinical decisions with individual patients.
Topics: Cardiovascular Diseases; Cholesterol, LDL; Female; Humans; Hydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase Inhibitors; Male; Myocardial Infarction; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Stroke
PubMed: 35285850
DOI: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2022.0134 -
Current Cardiology Reviews 2021Globally, dyslipidemia has been shown to be an independent predictor of many cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events, which led to recent advocacy towards dyslipidemia...
BACKGROUND
Globally, dyslipidemia has been shown to be an independent predictor of many cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events, which led to recent advocacy towards dyslipidemia prevention and control as a key risk factor and its prognostic significance to reduce the burden of stroke and myocardial infarction (MI).
AIMS
This study aimed to evaluate hyperlipidemia as a risk factor connected with stroke and CVD. Moreover, having identified this risk factor, the study evaluates how hyperlipidemia has been examined earlier and what can be done in the future.
METHODS
All prospective studies concerning hyperlipidemia as risk factors for stroke and CVD were identified by a search of PubMed/MEDLINE and EMBASE databases with keywords hyperlipidemia, risk factors, stroke, and cardiovascular disease.
RESULTS
The constant positive association between the incidence of coronary heart disease and cholesterol concentration of LDL is apparent in observational studies in different populations. Thus, the reduction of LDL cholesterol in those populations, particularly with regard to initial cholesterol concentrations, can reduce the risk of vascular diseases. However, the impact of using lipid-lowering drugs, such as statins, has been demonstrated in several studies as an important factor in decreasing the mortality and morbidity rates of patients with stroke and CVD.
CONCLUSION
After reviewing all the research mentioned in this review, most studies confirmed that hyperlipidemia is a risk factor for stroke and correlated in patients with CVD.
Topics: Cardiovascular Diseases; Cholesterol, LDL; Humans; Hyperlipidemias; Prospective Studies; Stroke
PubMed: 33305711
DOI: 10.2174/1573403X16999201210200342 -
The American Journal of Clinical... Aug 2015Dietary cholesterol has been suggested to increase the risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD), which has led to US recommendations to reduce cholesterol intake. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Dietary cholesterol has been suggested to increase the risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD), which has led to US recommendations to reduce cholesterol intake.
OBJECTIVE
The authors examine the effects of dietary cholesterol on CVD risk in healthy adults by using systematic review and meta-analysis.
DESIGN
MEDLINE, Cochrane Central, and Commonwealth Agricultural Bureau Abstracts databases were searched through December 2013 for prospective studies that quantified dietary cholesterol. Investigators independently screened citations and verified extracted data on study and participant characteristics, outcomes, and quality. Random-effect models meta-analysis was used when at least 3 studies reported the same CVD outcome.
RESULTS
Forty studies (17 cohorts in 19 publications with 361,923 subjects and 19 trials in 21 publications with 632 subjects) published between 1979 and 2013 were eligible for review. Dietary cholesterol was not statistically significantly associated with any coronary artery disease (4 cohorts; no summary RR), ischemic stroke (4 cohorts; summary RR: 1.13; 95% CI: 0.99, 1.28), or hemorrhagic stroke (3 cohorts; summary RR: 1.09; 95% CI: 0.79, 1.50). Dietary cholesterol statistically significantly increased both serum total cholesterol (17 trials; net change: 11.2 mg/dL; 95% CI: 6.4, 15.9) and low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol (14 trials; net change: 6.7 mg/dL; 95% CI: 1.7, 11.7 mg/dL). Increases in LDL cholesterol were no longer statistically significant when intervention doses exceeded 900 mg/d. Dietary cholesterol also statistically significantly increased serum high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (13 trials; net change: 3.2 mg/dL; 95% CI: 0.9, 9.7 mg/dL) and the LDL to high-density lipoprotein ratio (5 trials; net change: 0.2; 95% CI: 0.0, 0.3). Dietary cholesterol did not statistically significantly change serum triglycerides or very-low-density lipoprotein concentrations.
CONCLUSION
Reviewed studies were heterogeneous and lacked the methodologic rigor to draw any conclusions regarding the effects of dietary cholesterol on CVD risk. Carefully adjusted and well-conducted cohort studies would be useful to identify the relative effects of dietary cholesterol on CVD risk.
Topics: Brain Ischemia; Cardiovascular Diseases; Cholesterol; Cholesterol, Dietary; Cholesterol, HDL; Cholesterol, LDL; Coronary Artery Disease; Evidence-Based Medicine; Hemorrhagic Disorders; Humans; Non-Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Reproducibility of Results; Risk Factors; Stroke
PubMed: 26109578
DOI: 10.3945/ajcn.114.100305