4.6 Article

Suicide Mortality in Relation to Dietary Intake of n-3 and n-6 Polyunsaturated Fatty Acids and Fish: Equivocal Findings From 3 Large US Cohort Studies

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY
卷 179, 期 12, 页码 1458-1466

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1093/aje/kwu086

关键词

diet; docosahexaenoic acid; eicosapentaenoic acid; fish; linoleic acid; n-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids; suicide

资金

  1. National Cancer Institute (National Institutes of Health (NIH)) [P01CA087969, U19CA055075, R01CA050385]
  2. National Institute of Mental Health (NIH) [K23MH096620, R01MH091448]
  3. National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NIH) [R01NS061858]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Intake of n-3 and n-6 polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs) has been implicated in the pathogenesis of depression. We sought to estimate the association between intake of fish and n-3 and n-6 PUFAs and suicide mortality over the course of long-term follow-up. In this prospective cohort study, biennial questionnaires were administered to 42,290 men enrolled in the Health Professionals Follow-up Study (1988-2008), 72,231 women enrolled in the Nurses' Health Study (1986-2008), and 90,836 women enrolled in Nurses' Health Study II (1993-2007). Dietary fish and n-3 and n-6 PUFA intakes were assessed every 4 years using a validated food-frequency questionnaire. Suicide mortality was ascertained through blind physician review of death certificates and hospital or pathology reports. Adjusted relative risks of suicide mortality were estimated with multivariable Cox proportional hazards models and pooled across cohorts using random-effects meta-analysis. The pooled multivariable relative risks for suicide among persons in the highest quartile of intake of n-3 or n-6 PUFAs, relative to the lowest quartile, ranged from 1.08 to 1.46 for n-3 PUFAs (P-trend = 0.11-0.52) and from 0.68 to 1.19 for n-6 PUFAs (P-trend = 0.09-0.54). We did not find evidence that intake of n-3 PUFAs or fish lowered the risk of completed suicide.

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

4.6
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