MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2985565504 · doi:10.1093/advances/nmz113

Associations between Dietary Pulses Alone or with Other Legumes and Cardiometabolic Disease Outcomes: An Umbrella Review and Updated Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Prospective Cohort Studies

2019· review· en· W2985565504 on OpenAlex
Effie Viguiliouk, Andrea J. Glenn, Stephanie Nishi, Laura Chiavaroli, Maxine Seider, Tauseef Khan, Marialaura Bonaccio, Licia Iacoviello, Sonia Blanco Mejía, David J.A. Jenkins, Cyril W.C. Kendall, Hana Kahleová, Dario Rahelić, Jordi Salas‐Salvadó, John L. Sievenpiper

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in Nutrition · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNutritional Studies and Diet
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity of SaskatchewanSt. Michael's Hospital
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMedicineProspective cohort studyIncidence (geometry)Cohort studyMeta-analysisInternal medicineStroke (engine)Type 2 diabetesRelative riskDiabetes mellitusCohortConfidence intervalEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To update the European Association for the Study of Diabetes clinical practice guidelines for nutrition therapy, we conducted an umbrella review and updated systematic review and meta-analysis (SRMA) of prospective cohort studies of the association between dietary pulses with or without other legumes and cardiometabolic disease outcomes. We searched the PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases through March 2019. We included the most recent SRMAs of prospective cohort studies and new prospective cohort studies published after the census dates of the included SRMAs assessing the relation between dietary pulses with or without other legumes and incidence and mortality of cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) [including coronary heart disease (CHD), myocardial infarction (MI), and stroke], diabetes, hypertension, and/or obesity. Two independent reviewers extracted data and assessed risk of bias. Risk estimates were pooled using the generic inverse variance method and expressed as risk ratios (RRs) with 95% CIs. The overall certainty of the evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach. Six SRMAs were identified and updated to include 28 unique prospective cohort studies with the following number of cases for each outcome: CVD incidence, 10,261; CVD mortality, 16,168; CHD incidence, 7786; CHD mortality, 3331; MI incidence, 2585; stroke incidence, 8570; stroke mortality, 2384; diabetes incidence, 10,457; hypertension incidence, 83,284; obesity incidence, 8125. Comparing the highest with the lowest level of intake, dietary pulses with or without other legumes were associated with significant decreases in CVD (RR: 0.92; 95% CI: 0.85, 0.99), CHD (RR: 0.90; 95% CI: 0.83, 0.99), hypertension (RR: 0.91; 95% CI: 0.86, 0.97), and obesity (RR: 0.87; 95% CI: 0.81, 0.94) incidence. There was no association with MI, stroke, and diabetes incidence or CVD, CHD, and stroke mortality. The overall certainty of the evidence was graded as "low" for CVD incidence and "very low" for all other outcomes. Current evidence shows that dietary pulses with or without other legumes are associated with reduced CVD incidence with low certainty and reduced CHD, hypertension, and obesity incidence with very low certainty. More research is needed to improve our estimates. This trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT03555734.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Meta-epidemiology (broad)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.695
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0150.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.119
GPT teacher head0.432
Teacher spread0.313 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it