Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33037427›Full record

SynthesisAdvances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.)2021

The Impact of Protein Supplementation on Appetite and Energy Intake in Healthy Older Adults: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis.

Sana Ben-Harchache, Helen M Roche, Clare A Corish, Katy M Horner

Open access · bronzeAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Advances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 15% of its field
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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

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

4 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.

Sana Ben-HarchacheSchool of Public Health, Physiotherapy and Sport Science, University College Dublin, Belfield, Dublin, Ireland.
Helen M RocheSchool of Public Health, Physiotherapy and Sport Science, University College Dublin, Belfield, Dublin, Ireland.
Clare A CorishSchool of Public Health, Physiotherapy and Sport Science, University College Dublin, Belfield, Dublin, Ireland.
Katy M HornerSchool of Public Health, Physiotherapy and Sport Science, University College Dublin, Belfield, Dublin, Ireland.
University College Dublin · IE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Protein supplementation is an attractive strategy to prevent loss of muscle mass in older adults. However, it could be counterproductive due to adverse effects on appetite. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to determine the effects of protein supplementation on appetite and/or energy intake (EI) in healthy older adults. MEDLINE, The Cochrane Library, CINAHL, and Web of Science were searched up to June 2020. Acute and longitudinal studies in healthy adults ≥60 y of age that reported effects of protein supplementation (through supplements or whole foods) compared with control and/or preintervention (for longitudinal studies) on appetite ratings, appetite-related peptides, and/or EI were included. Random-effects model meta-analysis was performed on EI, with other outcomes qualitatively reviewed. Twenty-two studies (9 acute, 13 longitudinal) were included, involving 857 participants (331 males, 526 females). In acute studies (n = 8), appetite ratings were suppressed in 7 out of 24 protein arms. For acute studies reporting EI (n = 7, n = 22 protein arms), test meal EI was reduced following protein preload compared with control [mean difference (MD): -164 kJ; 95% CI: -299, -29 kJ; P  = 0.02]. However, when energy content of the supplement was accounted for, total EI was greater with protein compared with control (MD: 649 kJ; 95% CI: 438, 861 kJ; P < 0.00001). Longitudinal studies (n = 12 protein arms) showed a higher protein intake (MD: 0.29 g ⋅ kg-1 ⋅ d-1; 95% CI: 0.14, 0.45 g ⋅ kg-1 ⋅ d-1; P < 0.001) and no difference in daily EI between protein and control groups at the end of trials (MD: -54 kJ/d; 95% CI: -300, 193 kJ/d; P  = 0.67). While appetite ratings may be suppressed with acute protein supplementation, there is either a positive effect or no effect on total EI in acute and longitudinal studies, respectively. Therefore, protein supplementation may represent an effective solution to increase protein intakes in healthy older adults without compromising EI through appetite suppression. This trial was registered at PROSPERO as https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42019125771 (CRD42019125771).

Indexed as

AppetiteEnergy IntakeAgedAppetite RegulationDietary SupplementsFemaleHumansMaleMealsagingappetiteenergy intakegut hormoneshungerolder adultsprotein

Identifiers

PMID33037427
PMCPMC8009738
OpenAlexW3091811472

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.