Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21975919›Full record

SynthesisCurrent atherosclerosis reports2011

Effects of eicosapentaenoic acid versus docosahexaenoic acid on serum lipids: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Melissa Y Wei, Terry A Jacobson

Erratum issuedAbstract readComparative StudyMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Current atherosclerosis reports, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 110 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
110citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
14.3field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

110 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 278 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Trial
  19. Trial
  20. Trial

50 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

  • Erratum issued
5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Melissa Y WeiDepartment of Medicine, Emory University School of Medicine, 69 Jesse Hill Jr. Drive SE, Atlanta, GA 30303, USA. mywei@emory.edu
Terry A Jacobson
Emory University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Omega-3 fatty acid supplements containing both eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) have been shown to reduce triglycerides but also increase low-density lipoprotein (LDL). Whether EPA or DHA given as monotherapy has differential effects on serum lipoproteins has not been systematically evaluated. We performed a meta-analysis of randomized placebo-controlled trials of monotherapy with EPA (n=10), DHA (n=17), or EPA versus DHA (n=6). Compared with placebo, DHA raised LDL 7.23 mg/dL (95% CI, 3.98–10.5) whereas EPA non-significantly reduced LDL. In direct comparison studies, DHA raised LDL 4.63 mg/dL (95% CI, 2.15–7.10) more than EPA. Both EPA and DHA reduced triglycerides, with a greater reduction by DHA in direct comparison studies. DHA also raised high-density lipoprotein (4.49 mg/dL; 95% CI, 3.50–5.48) compared with placebo, whereas EPA did not. Although EPA and DHA both reduce triglycerides, they have divergent effects on LDL and high-density lipoprotein. Further research is needed to elucidate the mechanisms and significance of these differences.

Indexed as

Docosahexaenoic AcidsEicosapentaenoic AcidHumansLipidsDocosahexaenoic AcidsEicosapentaenoic AcidLipids

Identifiers

PMID21975919
OpenAlexW2138013532

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.