Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29282023›Full record

SynthesisBMC psychiatry2017

Is meat consumption associated with depression? A meta-analysis of observational studies.

Yi Zhang, Ye Yang, Ming-Sheng Xie, Xiang Ding, Hui Li, Zhi-Chen Liu, Shi-Fang Peng

Abstract readMeta-Analysis
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC psychiatry, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
–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

34 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Red and Processed Meat Consumption and Risk of Depression: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020
    Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Article
  10. Diffusion tensor imaging in chronic tension-type headache.Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland) · 2026
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. 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

7 authors.

Yi ZhangDepartment of Orthopaedics, Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan Province, 410008, China.
Ye YangDepartment of Orthopaedics, Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan Province, 410008, China.
Ming-Sheng XieDepartment of Orthopaedics, Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan Province, 410008, China.
Xiang DingDepartment of Orthopaedics, Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan Province, 410008, China.
Hui LiDepartment of Orthopaedics, Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan Province, 410008, China.
Zhi-Chen LiuDepartment of Orthopaedics, Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan Province, 410008, China.
Shi-Fang PengDepartment of Infectious Disease, Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan Province, 410008, China. sfp1988@hotmail.com.

Funding

China Scholarship Council 201706370196Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities of Central South University 2017zzts233
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundA number of epidemiological studies have examined the effect of meat consumption on depression. However, no conclusion has been reached. The aim of this study was to examine the relationship between meat consumption and depression.

methodsThe electronic databases of PUBMED and EMBASE were searched up to March 2017, for observational studies that examined the relationship between meat consumption and depression. The pooled odds ratio (OR) for the prevalence of depression and the relative risk (RR) for the incidence of depression, as well as their corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI), were calculated respectively (the highest versus the lowest category of meat consumption).

resultsA total of eight observational studies (three cross-sectional, three cohort and two case-control studies) were included in this meta-analysis. Specifically, six studies were related to the prevalence of depression, and the overall multi-variable adjusted OR suggested no significant association between meat consumption and the prevalence of depression (OR = 0.89, 95% CI: 0.65 to 1.22; P = 0.469). In contrast, for the three studies related to the incidence of depression, the overall multi-variable adjusted RR evidenced an association between meat consumption and a moderately higher incidence of depression (RR = 1.13, 95% CI: 1.03 to 1.24; P = 0.013).

conclusionsMeat consumption may be associated with a moderately higher risk of depression. However, it still warrants further studies to confirm such findings due to the limited number of prospective studies.

Indexed as

MeatCase-Control StudiesCross-Sectional StudiesDepressionDepressive DisorderHumansObservational Studies as TopicProspective StudiesRiskRisk FactorsDepressionMeatMeta-analysisObservational studies

Identifiers

PMID29282023
PMCPMC5745880

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.