Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24172298›Full record

ArticleThe American journal of clinical nutrition2013

Tea and flavonoids: where we are, where to go next.

Johanna T Dwyer, Julia Peterson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The American journal of clinical nutrition, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Preventive Applications of Polyphenols in Dentistry-A Review.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021
    Review
  9. A Comprehensive Review of the Potential Use of Green Tea Polyphenols in the Management of COVID-19.Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM · 2021
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Johanna T DwyerOffice of Dietary Supplements, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD (JTD); the Jean Mayer USDA Human Nutrition Research Center on Aging at Tufts University, Boston, MA (JTD); and the Friedman School of Nutrition Science and Policy, Tufts University, Boston, MA (JP).
Julia Peterson

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There is a need to evaluate the evidence about the health effects of tea flavonoids and to provide valid, specific, and actionable tea consumption information to consumers. Emerging evidence suggests that the flavonoids in tea may be associated with beneficial health outcomes, whereas the benefits and risks of tea extracts and supplements are less well known. The next steps in developing tea science should include a focus on the most promising leads, such as reducing the risk of cardiovascular disease and stroke, rather than pursuing smaller, more diffuse studies of many different health outcomes. Future tea research should also include the use of common reference standards, better characterization of intervention products, and application of batteries of biomarkers of intakes and outcomes across studies, which will allow a common body of evidence to be developed. Mechanistic studies should determine which tea bioactive constituents have effects, whether they act alone or in combination, and how they influence health. Clinical studies should use well-characterized test products, better descriptions of baseline diets, and validated biomarkers of intake and disease risk reduction. There should be more attention to careful safety monitoring and adverse event reporting. Epidemiologic investigations should be of sufficient size and duration to detect small effects, involve populations most likely to benefit, use more complete tea exposure assessment, and include both intermediary markers of risk as well as morbidity and mortality outcomes. The construction of a strong foundation of scientific evidence on tea and health outcomes is essential for developing more specific and actionable messages on tea for consumers.

Indexed as

HealthPhytotherapyAnimalsCamellia sinensisCardiovascular DiseasesDrug LabelingEvidence-Based MedicineFlavonoidsHumansPlant ExtractsTeaFlavonoidsPlant ExtractsTea

Identifiers

PMID24172298
PMCPMC3831543

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.