Evidence Hub

Dietary intake of total, animal, and plant proteins and risk of all cause, cardiovascular, and cancer mortality: systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies

S. Naghshi, O. Sadeghi, W. Willett, Ahmad Esmaillzadeh

British medical journal, 2020

715 participants · 299 citations

Abstract

Abstract Objective To examine and quantify the potential dose-response relation between intake of total, animal, and plant protein and the risk of mortality from all causes, cardiovascular disease, and cancer. Design Systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies. Data sources PubMed, Scopus, and ISI Web of Science until December 2019, and references of retrieved relevant articles. Study selection Prospective cohort studies that reported the risk estimates for all cause, cardiovascular, and cancer mortality in adults aged 18 or older. Data synthesis Random effects models were used to calculate pooled effect sizes and 95% confidence intervals for the highest versus lowest categories of protein intake and to incorporate variation between studies. Linear and non-linear dose-response analyses were done to evaluate the dose-response relations between protein intake and mortality. Results 32 prospective cohort studies were included in the systematic review and 31 in the meta-analysis. During the follow-up period of 3.5 to 32 years, 113 039 deaths (16 429‬ from cardiovascular disease and 22 303‬ from cancer) occurred among 715 128 participants. Intake of total protein was associated with a lower risk of all cause mortality (pooled effect size 0.94, 95% confidence interval 0.89 to 0.99, I2=58.4%, P<0.001). Intake of plant protein was significantly associated with a lower risk of all cause mortality (pooled effect size 0.92, 95% confidence interval 0.87 to 0.97,…

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. Reported size: 715 participants or records.

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