SynthesisPloS one2021
Dietary risk factors for hip fracture in adults: An umbrella review of meta-analyses of prospective cohort studies.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Meat consumption and the risk of hip fracture in women and men: two prospective Swedish cohort studies.European journal of nutrition · 2024Article
- Nutritional strategies to optimise musculoskeletal health for fall and fracture prevention: Looking beyond calcium, vitamin D and protein.Bone reports · 2023Review
- Can Nutrition Contribute to a Reduction in Sarcopenia, Frailty, and Comorbidities in a Super-Aged Society?Nutrients · 2023Review
- A Cross-Sectional Study Based on Forty Systematic Reviews of Foods with Function Claims (FFC) in Japan: Quality Assessment Using AMSTAR 2.Nutrients · 2023Review
- Risk of hip fracture in meat-eaters, pescatarians, and vegetarians: results from the UK Women's Cohort Study.BMC medicine · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo summarise the totality of evidence regarding dietary risk factors for hip fracture in adults, evaluating the quality of evidence, to provide recommendations for practice and further research.
designSystematic review of meta-analyses of prospective cohort studies. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Systematic reviews with meta-analyses reporting summary risk estimates for associations between hip fracture incidence and dietary exposures including oral intake of a food, food group, beverage, or nutrient, or adherence to dietary patterns. INFORMATION SOURCES: Medline, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library from inception until November 2020. DATA SYNTHESIS: The methodological quality of systematic reviews and meta-analyses was assessed using AMSTAR-2, and the quality of evidence for each association was assessed using GRADE. Results were synthesised descriptively.
resultsSixteen systematic reviews were identified, covering thirty-four exposures, including dietary patterns (n = 2 meta-analyses), foods, food groups, or beverages (n = 16), macronutrients (n = 3), and micronutrients (n = 13). Identified meta-analyses included 6,282 to 3,730,424 participants with between 322 and 26,168 hip fractures. The methodological quality (AMSTAR-2) of all systematic reviews was low or critically low. The quality of evidence (GRADE) was low for an inverse association between hip fracture incidence and intake of fruits and vegetables combined (adjusted summary relative risk for higher vs lower intakes: 0.92 [95% confidence interval: 0.87 to 0.98]), and very low for the remaining thirty-three exposures.
conclusionDietary factors may play a role in the primary prevention of hip fracture, but the methodological quality of systematic reviews and meta-analyses was below international standards, and there was a lack of high-quality evidence. More long-term cohort studies reporting absolute risks and robust, well-conducted meta-analyses with dose-response information are needed before policy guidelines can be formed. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42020226190.
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.