P5308Mediterranean-style diet for the primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease: Cochrane systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Observational studies have confirmed the benefits of adherence to a Mediterranean dietary pattern on cardiovascular disease (CVD) but the randomised controlled trial (RCT) evidence is limited. Objective To determine the effectiveness of a Mediterranean-style diet for the primary and secondary prevention of CVD. Methods We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, DARE, HTA, NHS EED and trial registers (September 2018). We selected RCTs in healthy adults and adults at high risk of CVD (primary prevention) and those with established CVD (secondary prevention). Both of the following key components were required for our definition of a Mediterranean-style diet: high monounsaturated/saturated fat ratio and a high intake of plant based foods, including fruits, vegetables, and legumes. The intervention could be dietary advice, provision of relevant foods or both. The comparison group received either no intervention, minimal intervention, usual care or another dietary intervention. Outcomes included clinical events and CVD risk factors. We included only studies with follow-up periods of 3 months or more. Results Overall, 30 RCTs (12,461 participants randomised) and 7 ongoing trials met our inclusion criteria, whereas 22 primary prevention trials and 6 secondary prevention trials were analysed. Low quality evidence shows little or no effect of the PREDIMED (7747 randomised) intervention (advice to follow a Mediterranean diet plus supplemental extra virgin olive oil or tree nuts) compared to a low fat diet on CVD mortality (HR 0.81 (95% CI 0.5, 1.32)) or total mortality (HR 1.0 (95% CI 0.81, 1.24)) over 4.8 years. There was however a reduction in the number of strokes with the PREDIMED intervention (HR 0.6 (95% CI 0.45, 0.8), moderate quality evidence). For secondary prevention, in the Lyon Diet Heart Study (605 CVD patients), there was moderate quality evidence of a reduction in CVD mortality (HR 0.35 (95% CI 0.15, 0.82)) and total mortality (HR 0.44 (95% CI 0.21, 0.92)) with the intervention, over 46 months. For CVD risk factors, in primary prevention trials, there was low quality evidence for a possible small reduction in total cholesterol (−0.16 mmol/L (95% CI −0.32, 0.00), and moderate quality evidence for a reduction in SBP (−2.99 mmHg (95% CI −3.45, −2.53)) and DBP (−2.0 mmHg (95% CI −2.29, −1.71)). In secondary prevention trials, there was moderate quality evidence of no effect of a Mediterranean-style diet on lipid levels and low or very low quality evidence for blood pressure. Conclusions Despite the relatively large number of studies included in this review, there is still some uncertainty regarding the effects of a Mediterranean-style diet on clinical endpoints and CVD risk factors for both primary and secondary prevention. The ongoing studies may provide more certainty in the future.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.014 | 0.039 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.024 | 0.026 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.011 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".