ArticleMedicine2025
Association between dietary protein intake and all-cause mortality among individuals with different estimated glomerular filtration rates: A cohort study from NHANES.
Article in Medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Previous studies suggested that dietary protein may influence health outcomes; however, its effects on all-cause mortality in people with different estimated glomerular filtration rates (eGFRs) remain unclear. This study used data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey and the National Death Index from 1999 to 2018 and included 48,930 participants. They were categorized into three groups based on eGFRs: Group 1 ≥ 90 mL/min/1.73 m2; Group 2, 60 < 90 mL/min/1.73 m2; and Group 3 < 60 mL/min/1.73 m2. The participants were further divided into four protein intake levels: Group A < 0.6 g/kg/d; Group B, 0.6 < 0.8 g/kg/d; Group C, 0.8 < 1.2 g/kg/d; and Group D ≥ 1.2 g/kg/d, resulting in group classifications of Group1A, 1B, 1C, 1D, 2A, 2B, 2C, 2D, 3A, 3B, 3C, and 3D. Cox regression analysis and restricted cubic spline models were employed to assess both the relationship and the nonlinear effects of protein intake on all-cause mortality across different eGFR groups. After multivariable adjustments, the protein intake in Groups 1C and 1D had hazard ratios (HRs) of 0.78 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.62, 0.99) and 0.76 (95% CI: 0.59, 0.99), respectively, compared to Group 1A. The HR for protein intake in Group 2C was 0.84 (95% CI: 0.74, 0.97) compared to Group 2A. However, no significant differences in HR were observed across protein intake levels in eGFR Group 3. A nonlinear relationship between protein intake and all-cause mortality was found in Groups 1 and 2, with P values of .0059 and .0011, respectively. In contrast, no statistically significant nonlinear relationship was found in eGFR Group 3. This study found that the impact of dietary protein intake on all-cause mortality varied with eGFRs.
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.