ReviewNutrients2018
Omega-3 Fatty Acid Supplementation and Cardiovascular Disease Risk: Glass Half Full or Time to Nail the Coffin Shut?
Review in Nutrients, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effect of n-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids on ischemic heart disease and cardiometabolic risk factors: a two-sample Mendelian randomization study.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2021Trial
- Trial
- Perspective: Planning and Conducting Statistical Analyses for Human Nutrition Randomized Controlled Trials: Ensuring Data Quality and Integrity.Advances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.) · 2021Article
- Risk of cardiovascular events in patients with hypertriglyceridaemia: A review of real-world evidence.Diabetes, obesity & metabolism · 2020Review
- Article
- Concentration-Dependent Effects of N-3 Long-Chain Fatty Acids on Na,K-ATPase Activity in Human Endothelial Cells.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2019Article
- Association of Dietary n3 and n6 Fatty Acids Intake with Hypertension: NHANES 2007-2014.Nutrients · 2019Article
- Effect of linoleic acid on ischemic heart disease and its risk factors: a Mendelian randomization study.BMC medicine · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
There has been a great deal of controversy in recent years about the potential role of dietary supplementation with long-chain omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids (n-3 PUFA) in the prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD). Four recent meta-analyses have been published that evaluated randomized, controlled trial (RCT) data from studies that assessed the effects of supplemental n-3 PUFA intake on CVD endpoints. The authors of those reports reached disparate conclusions. This review explores the reasons informed experts have drawn different conclusions from the evidence, and addresses implications for future investigation. Although RCT data accumulated to date have failed to provide unequivocal evidence of CVD risk reduction with n-3 PUFA supplementation, many studies were limited by design issues, including low dosage, no assessment of n-3 status, and absence of a clear biological target or pathophysiologic hypothesis for the intervention. The most promising evidence supports n-3 PUFA supplementation for prevention of cardiac death. Two ongoing trials have enrolled high cardiovascular risk subjects with hypertriglyceridemia and are administering larger dosages of n-3 PUFA than employed in previous RCTs. These are expected to clarify the potential role of long-chain n-3 PUFA supplementation in CVD risk management.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.