MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4384666651 · doi:10.7717/peerj.15688

Tea intake or consumption and the risk of dementia: a meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies

2023· review· en· W4384666651 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ning Jiang, Jinlong Ma, Qian Wang, Yuzhen Xu, Baojian Wei

Bibliographic record

VenuePeerJ · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTea Polyphenols and Effects
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersQingdao UniversityShandong First Medical UniversityNatural Science Foundation of Shandong ProvinceNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsMeta-analysisMedicinePublication biasFunnel plotDementiaSubgroup analysisRelative riskProspective cohort studyCohort studyCochrane LibraryGerontologyDemographyEnvironmental healthInternal medicineDiseaseConfidence interval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose Dementia affects as many as 130 million people, which presents a significant and growing medical burden globally. This meta-analysis aims to assess whether tea intake, tea consumption can reduce the risk of dementia, Alzheimer’s disease (AD) and Vascular dementia (VD). Patients and methods Cochrane Library, PubMed and Embase were searched for cohort studies from inception to November 1, 2022. The Newcastle Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale (NOS) was applied to evaluate the risk of bias of the included studies. We extracted the data as the relative risks (RRs) for the outcome of the interest, and conducted the meta-analysis utilizing the random effect model due to the certain heterogeneity. Sensitivity analysis were performed by moving one study at a time, Subgroup-analysis was carried out according to different ages and dementia types. And the funnel plots based on Egger’s and Begger’s regression tests were used to evaluate publication bias. All statistical analyses were performed using Stata statistical software version 14.0 and R studio version 4.2.0. Results Seven prospective cohort studies covering 410,951 individuals, which were published from 2009 and 2022 were included in this meta-analysis. The methodological quality of these studies was relatively with five out of seven being of high quality and the remaining being of moderate. The pooling analysis shows that the relationship between tea intake or consumption is associated with a reduced risk of all-cause dementia (RR = 0.71, 95% CI [0.57–0.88], I 2 = 79.0%, p < 0.01). Further, the subgroup-analysis revealed that tea intake or consumption is associated with a reduced risk of AD (RR = 0.88, 95% CI [0.79–0.99], I 2 = 52.6%, p = 0.024) and VD (RR = 0.75, 95% CI [0.66–0.85], I = 0.00%, p < 0.001). Lastly, tea intake or consumption could reduce the risk of all-cause dementia to a greater degree among populations with less physical activity, older age, APOE carriers, and smokers. Conclusion Our meta-analysis demonstrated that tea (green tea or black tea) intake or consumption is associated with a significant reduction in the risk of dementia, AD or VD. These findings provide evidence that tea intake or consumption should be recognized as an independent protective factor against the onset of dementia, AD or VD.

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Review
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Meta-analysislow
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Review
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Meta-analysishigh
models agreeAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.417

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.002
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 head0.247
GPT teacher head0.438
Teacher spread0.192 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations11
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePeerJSame topicTea Polyphenols and EffectsFrench-language works237,207