MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4398761504 · doi:10.3390/nu16111583

Broccoli Consumption and Risk of Cancer: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies

2024· review· en· W4398761504 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Eduard Baladía, Manuel Moñino, Eulogio Pleguezuelos, Giuseppe Russolillo, Manuel Vicente Garnacho‐Castaño

Bibliographic record

VenueNutrients · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMorinda citrifolia extract uses
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMeta-analysisMedicineCochrane LibraryPublication biasObservational studySubgroup analysisCohort studySystematic reviewMEDLINERelative riskCancerInternal medicineStudy heterogeneityOncologyConfidence intervalBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: The scientific literature has reported an inverse association between broccoli consumption and the risk of suffering from several types of cancer; however, the results were not entirely consistent across studies. A systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies were conducted to determine the association between broccoli consumption and cancer risk with the aim of clarifying the beneficial biological effects of broccoli consumption on cancer. Methods: PubMed/MEDLINE, Web of Science, Scopus, Cochrane Library (CENTRAL), and Epistemonikos databases were searched to identify all published papers that evaluate the impact of broccoli consumption on the risk of cancer. Citation chasing of included studies was conducted as a complementary search strategy. The risk of bias in individual studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. A random-effects model meta-analysis was employed to quantitatively synthesize results, with the I2 index used to assess heterogeneity. Results: Twenty-three case–control studies (n = 12,929 cases and 18,363 controls; n = 31,292 individuals) and 12 cohort studies (n = 699,482 individuals) were included in the meta-analysis. The results suggest an inverse association between broccoli consumption and the risk of cancer both in case–control studies (OR: 0.64, 95% CI from 0.58 to 0.70, p < 0.001; Q = 35.97, p = 0.072, I2 = 30.49%—moderate heterogeneity; τ2 = 0.016) and cohort studies (RR: 0.89, 95% CI from 0.82 to 0.96, p = 0.003; Q = 13.51, p = 0.333, I2 = 11.21%—low heterogeneity; τ2 = 0.002). Subgroup analysis suggested a potential benefit of broccoli consumption in site-specific cancers only in case–control studies. Conclusions: In summary, the findings indicate that individuals suffering from some type of cancer consumed less broccoli, suggesting a protective biological effect of broccoli on cancer. More studies, especially cohort studies, are necessary to clarify the possible beneficial effect of broccoli on several types of cancer.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.021
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.044
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.113

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0210.044
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0170.040
Bibliometrics0.0130.012
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.360
GPT teacher head0.487
Teacher spread0.127 · 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

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

Citations10
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNutrientsSame topicMorinda citrifolia extract usesFrench-language works237,207