4.3 Review

Mediterranean diet and health status: an updated meta-analysis and a proposal for a literature-based adherence score

期刊

PUBLIC HEALTH NUTRITION
卷 17, 期 12, 页码 2769-2782

出版社

CAMBRIDGE UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1017/S1368980013003169

关键词

Mediterranean diet; Meta-analysis; Update; Score

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: To update previous meta-analyses of cohort studies that investigated the association between the Mediterranean diet and health status and to utilize data coming from all of the cohort studies for proposing a literature-based adherence score to the Mediterranean diet. Design: We conducted a comprehensive literature search through all electronic databases up to June 2013. Setting: Cohort prospective studies investigating adherence to the Mediterranean diet and health outcomes. Cut-off values of food groups used to compute the adherence score were obtained. Subjects: The updated search was performed in an overall population of 4172 412 subjects, with eighteen recent studies that were not present in the previous meta-analyses. Results: A 2-point increase in adherence score to the Mediterranean diet was reported to determine an 8% reduction of overall mortality (relative risk = 0.92; 95% CI 0.91, 0.93), a 10% reduced risk of CVD (relative risk = 0.90; 95% CI 0.87, 0.92) and a 4% reduction of neoplastic disease (relative risk = 0.96; 95% CI 0.95, 0.97). We utilized data coming from all cohort studies available in the literature for proposing a literature-based adherence score. Such a score ranges from 0 (minimal adherence) to 18 (maximal adherence) points and includes three different categories of consumption for each food group composing the Mediterranean diet. Conclusions: The Mediterranean diet was found to be a healthy dietary pattern in terms of morbidity and mortality. By using data from the cohort studies we proposed a literature-based adherence score that can represent an easy tool for the estimation of adherence to the Mediterranean diet also at the individual level.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据