Evidence Hub

Fish Consumption and the Risk of Depression: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies

Kim E, Je Y

Nutrients, 2025

2 citations

Abstract

Background/Objectives: This systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies aimed to assess the association between fish consumption and the risk of general and pregnancy-related depression, with implications for public health promotion. Methods: We retrieved 5074 articles from PubMed and Embase through November 2023 and included 35 observational studies in the analysis. We synthesized effect estimates as relative risks (RRs) with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using a random-effects model. Additional dose-response analyses and stratified subgroup analyses were performed. Results: A significant inverse association was found between fish consumption and depression risk (RR = 0.79, 95% CI: 0.73 to 0.86). A similar association was observed for pregnancy-related depression (RR = 0.78, 95% CI: 0.69-0.89). Stratified analyses showed that only studies with fish intake ≥ 68.4 g/day demonstrated a statistically significant reduction in depression risk (RR = 0.75, 95% CI: 0.67-0.84), whereas studies with lower intake (Conclusions: This meta-analysis supports fish consumption as a modifiable factor for depression prevention, with ≥68.4 g/day as a possible threshold, potentially informing dietary guidelines and public health strategies.

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free