Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32131999›Full record

ArticleBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2020

Associations of habitual fish oil supplementation with cardiovascular outcomes and all cause mortality: evidence from a large population based cohort study.

Zhi-Hao Li, Wen-Fang Zhong, Simin Liu, Virginia Byers Kraus, Yu-Jie Zhang, Xiang Gao, Yue-Bin Lv, Dong Shen, Xi-Ru Zhang, Pei-Dong Zhang and 6 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing papers in PubMed, 4 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

36 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

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

16 authors.

Zhi-Hao LiDepartment of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China.
Wen-Fang ZhongDepartment of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China.
Simin LiuDepartments of Epidemiology, Medicine, and Surgery, and Center for Global Cardiometabolic Health, Brown University, Providence, RI, USA.
Virginia Byers KrausDuke Molecular Physiology Institute and Division of Rheumatology, Department of Medicine, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, USA.
Yu-Jie ZhangDepartment of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China.
Xiang GaoDepartment of Nutritional Sciences, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, USA.
Yue-Bin LvNational Institute of Environmental Health, Chinese Centre for Disease Control and Prevention, Beijing, China.
Dong ShenDepartment of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China.
Xi-Ru ZhangDepartment of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China.
Pei-Dong ZhangDepartment of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China.
Qing-Mei HuangDepartment of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China.
Qing ChenDepartment of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China.
Xian-Bo WuDepartment of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China.
Xiao-Ming ShiNational Institute of Environmental Health, Chinese Centre for Disease Control and Prevention, Beijing, China.
Dong WangSchool of Health Services Management, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China.
Chen MaoDepartment of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China maochen9@smu.edu.cn.ORCID 0000-0002-6537-6215

Funding

Resource Core 3 - Metabolomics CoreP30AG028716 · NIA · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI Sarah B. Peskoe · 2006 to 2026
$24.6M
NIA NIH HHS P30 AG028716
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo evaluate the associations of habitual fish oil supplementation with cardiovascular disease (CVD) and mortality in a large prospective cohort.

designPopulation based, prospective cohort study.

settingUK Biobank.

participantsA total of 427 678 men and women aged between 40 and 69 who had no CVD or cancer at baseline were enrolled between 2006 and 2010 and followed up to the end of 2018. MAIN EXPOSURE: All participants answered questions on the habitual use of supplements, including fish oil.

main outcome measuresAll cause mortality, CVD mortality, and CVD events.

resultsAt baseline, 133 438 (31.2%) of the 427 678 participants reported habitual use of fish oil supplements. The multivariable adjusted hazard ratios for habitual users of fish oil versus non-users were 0.87 (95% confidence interval 0.83 to 0.90) for all cause mortality, 0.84 (0.78 to 0.91) for CVD mortality, and 0.93 (0.90 to 0.96) for incident CVD events. For CVD events, the association seemed to be stronger among those with prevalent hypertension (P for interaction=0.005).

conclusionsHabitual use of fish oil seems to be associated with a lower risk of all cause and CVD mortality and to provide a marginal benefit against CVD events among the general population.

Indexed as

AdultAgedCardiovascular DiseasesDietary SupplementsFemaleFish OilsHumansMaleMiddle AgedProspective StudiesRisk FactorsUnited KingdomFish Oils

Identifiers

PMID32131999
PMCPMC7249244

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.