Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33297391›Full record

SynthesisNutrients2020

Whole Grains, Refined Grains, and Cancer Risk: A Systematic Review of Meta-Analyses of Observational Studies.

Glenn A Gaesser

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Nutrients, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 78 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
78citing 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

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

  1. Sustainable dietary recommendations for the Spanish population.European journal of clinical nutrition · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article

18 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

1 author.

Glenn A GaesserCollege of Health Solutions, Arizona State University, Phoenix, AZ 85004, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-5127-5336

Funding

American Bakers Association no grant number
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

PubMed, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were searched for meta-analyses that provided risk estimates (±95% confidence intervals) for associations between intakes of whole and refined grains and risk of total and site-specific cancer. The preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed. Only meta-analyses that included whole grains and refined grains as separate food groups, and not as part of dietary patterns, were included. A total of 17 publications were identified that met inclusion criteria. Within these, results from a total of 54 distinct meta-analyses were reported for whole grains and 5 meta-analyses for refined grains. For total cancer mortality, 7 meta-analyses of cohort studies indicated that whole grain intake was associated with 6% to 12% lower risk in comparison of highest vs. lowest intake groups, and 3% to 20% lower risk for doses ranging from 15 to 90 g/day. For site-specific cancers, meta-analyses indicated that whole grain intake was consistently associated with lower risks of colorectal, colon, gastric, pancreatic, and esophageal cancers. Limited data were available for refined grains, with only 4 publications providing risk estimates, and only 1 of the meta-analyses included more than 3 studies. High intake of refined grains was associated with increased risk of colon and gastric cancer. By contrast, in the only dose-response meta-analysis, each 90 g/day consumption of refined grains was associated with a 6% lower risk of total cancer. In addition to the limited number of published meta-analyses on refined grains, results were also weakened due to the fact that refined grains were frequently defined to include both staple grain foods and indulgent grain foods, and the majority of studies included in the meta-analyses provided no specific definition of refined grains. Overall, meta-analyses of cohort and case-control studies consistently demonstrate that whole grain intake is associated with lower risk of total and site-specific cancer, and support current dietary recommendations to increase whole grain consumption. By contrast, the relationship between refined grain intake and cancer risk is inconclusive.

Indexed as

Edible GrainWhole GrainsAdultAgedCase-Control StudiesCohort StudiesDietDiet, HealthyFemaleHumansMaleMeta-Analysis as TopicMiddle AgedNeoplasmsObservational Studies as TopicRisk Factorscase-controlcerealschronic diseasecohortdietepidemiologyfibermortality

Identifiers

PMID33297391
PMCPMC7762239

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.