ArticleAtencion primaria2021
[Reduction of red and processed meats in the Spanish population: What is its impact on total and cardiovascular mortality?]
Article in Atencion primaria, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Changes in the Current Patterns of Beef Consumption and Consumer Behavior Trends-Cross-Cultural Study Brazil-Spain-Turkey.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveQuantify the impact of reducing the consumption of red/processed meats on cardiovascular mortality and all-cause mortality of the Spanish adult population based in 5 revisions published. PARTICIPANTS AND MAIN MEASUREMENTS: We defined exposure as consumption of ≥3 servings/week of red or processed meats and considered four possible scenarios of exposed population (30%-60%). Based on data from the Spanish National Statistics Institute, we calculated the weighted mortality between 40 and 80years. Using the relative risks (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) published by the referred revisions (RR=0.88; IC95%: 0.84-0.93 for all-cause mortality and RR=0.92; IC95%: 0.90-0.93 for cardiovascular mortality), we calculated the expected mortality rate in both exposed and unexposed categories. By multiplying these rates by the number of exposed individuals, we estimated the attributable number of yearly deaths.
resultsIf 60% of the population was exposed, with a 95%CI, the number of cardiovascular deaths that could be averted each year if population consumed <3 servings/week of red or processed meats was between 2.112 and 3.055. If was exposed that 30%, the difference in the yearly number of potentially averted deaths was between 1.079 and 1.577.
conclusionsEven under the most conservative assumption, the benefit, at the population level, of reducing red or processed meats consumption <3 servings/week on cardiovascular mortality is important. The conclusions of the recently published reviews contradicted their own results and contributed to a state of confusion that can create substantial harm for public health.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.