Effects of the Mediterranean Diet on Cardiovascular Outcomes—A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A Mediterranean dietary pattern is widely recommended for the prevention of chronic disease. We sought to define the most likely effects of the Mediterranean diet on vascular disease and mortality. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Central Register without language restriction for randomized controlled trials comparing Mediterranean to control diets. Data on study design, patient characteristics, interventions, follow-up duration, outcomes and adverse events were sought. Individual study relative risks (RR) were pooled to create summary estimates. RESULTS: Six studies with a total of 10950 participants were included. Effects on major vascular events (n = 477), death (n = 693) and vascular deaths (n = 315) were reported for 3, 5 and 4 studies respectively. For one large study (n = 1000) there were serious concerns about the integrity of the data. When data for all studies were combined there was evidence of protection against major vascular events (RR 0.63, 95% confidence interval 0.53-0.75), coronary events (0.65, 0.50-0.85), stroke (0.65, 0.48-0.88) and heart failure (0.30, 0.17-0.56) but not for all-cause mortality (1.00, 0.86-1.15) or cardiovascular mortality (0.90, 0.72-1.11). After the study of concern was excluded the benefit for vascular events (0.69, 0.55-0.86) and stroke (0.66, 0.48-0.92) persisted but apparently positive findings for coronary events (0.73, 0.51-1.05) and heart failure (0.25, 0.05-1.17) disappeared. CONCLUSION: The Mediterranean diet may protect against vascular disease. However, both the quantity and quality of the available evidence is limited and highly variable. Results must be interpreted with caution.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.017 | 0.009 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".