Vegetarian dietary patterns and cardiovascular risk factors and disease prevention: An umbrella review of systematic reviews
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Diet significantly influences the risk of developing cardiovascular disease (CVD), the leading cause of death in the United States. As vegetarian dietary patterns are increasingly being included within clinical practice guidelines, there is a need to review the most recent evidence regarding if and how these dietary patterns mitigate CVD risk. Objective This umbrella review of systematic reviews compared the relationships between vegetarian, vegan and non-vegetarian dietary patterns and CVD health outcomes and risk factors among presumably healthy adults (≥18 years) in the general population. Methods MEDLINE, CINAHL, Cochrane Databases of Systematic Reviews, Food Science Source and SportsDiscus databases were searched for systematic reviews (SRs) published from 2018 until March 2024. Eligible SRs and meta-analyses examined relationships between vegetarian or vegan diets and CVD risk factors and disease outcomes compared to non-vegetarian diets. SRs were screened in duplicate, and SR quality was assessed with AMSTAR2. The overall certainty of evidence (COE) was evaluated using the Grading of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) method. Results There were 758 articles identified in the databases’ search and 21 SRs met inclusion criteria. SRs targeting the general population had primarily observational evidence. Vegetarian, including vegan, dietary patterns were associated with reduced risk for CVD incidence [Relative Risk: 0.85 (0.79, 0.92)] and CVD mortality [Hazard Ratio: 0.92 (0.85, 0.99)] compared to non-vegetarian diets. Vegan dietary patterns were associated with reductions in CVD risk factors including blood pressure [systolic mean difference (95 % CI): -2.56 mmHg (-4.66, -0.445)], low-density lipoprotein cholesterol [-0.49 mmol/l (-0.62, -0.36)], and body mass index [-1.72 kg/m 2 (-2.30, -1.16)] compared to non-vegetarian dietary patterns, as well as c-reactive protein concentrations in a novel meta-analysis [-0.55 mg/l (-1.07, -0.03)]. Conclusion Practitioners can consider recommending vegetarian dietary patterns to reduce cardiometabolic risk factors and risk of CVD incidence and mortality.
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 | 0.032 | 0.130 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.013 | 0.009 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.032 | 0.029 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".