Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33300582›Full record

ArticleNutrition reviews2020

Dose-response relationship between protein intake and muscle mass increase: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Ryoichi Tagawa, Daiki Watanabe, Kyoko Ito, Keisuke Ueda, Kyosuke Nakayama, Chiaki Sanbongi, Motohiko Miyachi

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Nutrition reviews, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 55 papers, 8 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
55citing papers in PubMed, 8 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

55 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

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

Ryoichi TagawaNutrition and Food Function Research Department, Food Microbiology and Function Research Laboratories, R&D Division, Meiji Co, Ltd, Tokyo, Japan.
Daiki WatanabeDepartment of Physical Activity Research, National Institute of Health and Nutrition, National Institutes of Biomedical Innovation, Health and Nutrition, Tokyo, Japan.
Kyoko ItoNutrition and Food Function Research Department, Food Microbiology and Function Research Laboratories, R&D Division, Meiji Co, Ltd, Tokyo, Japan.
Keisuke UedaNutrition and Food Function Research Department, Food Microbiology and Function Research Laboratories, R&D Division, Meiji Co, Ltd, Tokyo, Japan.
Kyosuke NakayamaNutrition and Food Function Research Department, Food Microbiology and Function Research Laboratories, R&D Division, Meiji Co, Ltd, Tokyo, Japan.
Chiaki SanbongiNutrition and Food Function Research Department, Food Microbiology and Function Research Laboratories, R&D Division, Meiji Co, Ltd, Tokyo, Japan.
Motohiko MiyachiDepartment of Physical Activity Research, National Institute of Health and Nutrition, National Institutes of Biomedical Innovation, Health and Nutrition, Tokyo, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

contextLean body mass is essential for health, yet consensus regarding the effectiveness of protein interventions in increasing lean body mass is lacking.

objectiveThe aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the dose-response relationship of the effects of protein intake on lean body mass. DATA SOURCES: The PubMed and Ichushi-Web databases were searched electronically, and reference lists of the literature included here and in other meta-analyses were searched manually. STUDY SELECTION: Randomized controlled trials evaluating the effects of protein intake on lean body mass were included. DATA EXTRACTION: Two authors independently screened the abstracts; 5 reviewed the full texts.

resultsA total of 5402 study participants from 105 articles were included. In the multivariate spline model, the mean increase in lean body mass associated with an increase in protein intake of 0.1 g/kg of body weight per day was 0.39 kg (95%CI, 0.36-0.41) and 0.12 kg (95%CI, 0.11-0.14) below and above the total protein intake of 1.3 g/kg/d, respectively.

conclusionsThese findings suggest that slightly increasing current protein intake for several months by 0.1 g/kg/d in a dose-dependent manner over a range of doses from 0.5 to 3.5 g/kg/d may increase or maintain lean body mass. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: UMIN registration number UMIN000039285.

Indexed as

body compositiondietproteinsupplement

Identifiers

PMID33300582
PMCPMC7727026

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.