Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31341477›Full record

ReviewJournal of oncology2019

The Protective Effect of Dietary Phytosterols on Cancer Risk: A Systematic Meta-Analysis.

Lu Jiang, Xin Zhao, Jun Xu, Chujun Li, Yue Yu, Wei Wang, Lingjun Zhu

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of oncology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
37citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

37 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Supercritical COMolecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Article
  10. Review
  11. Phytosterols: Potential Therapeutic Effects and Challenges in Food Industry.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2024
    Article
  12. Implication of Oxysterols and Phytosterols in Aging and Human Diseases.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2024
    Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  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.

Lu JiangDepartment of Oncology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9874-1047
Xin ZhaoDepartment of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2860-5899
Jun XuDepartment of Oncology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1419-8228
Chujun LiDepartment of Plastic and Burns Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7108-4457
Yue YuDepartment of Cardiovascular Medicine, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1733-7868
Wei WangDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9027-5566
Lingjun ZhuDepartment of Oncology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8033-1528

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUNDS/

aimsMany studies have explored the association between dietary phytosterols and cancer risk, but the results have been inconsistent. We aimed to provide a synopsis of the current understanding of phytosterol intake for cancer risk through a systematic evaluation of the results from previous studies.

methodsWe performed a literature search of PUBMED, EMBASE, CNKI, and Wanfang, and studies published before May 2019 focusing on dietary total phytosterols,

resultsThe summary relative risk for the highest versus the lowest intake was 0.63 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.49-0.81) for total phytosterols, 0.74 (95% CI = 0.54-1.02) for

conclusionOur findings support the hypothesis that high phytosterol intake is inversely related to risk of cancer. Further studies with prospective designs that control for vital confounders and investigate the important anticancer effects of dietary phytosterols are warranted.

Identifiers

PMID31341477
PMCPMC6612402

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.