Methods | RCT | |
Participants | Free living men who had participated in NDHS 1st studies (USA) CVD risk: low Control: randomised 304, analysed 280 Intervention F: randomised 127, analysed 112 Mean years in trial: control 0.6, intervention 0.6 % male: 100 Age: unclear (all 45-54) |
|
Interventions | Modified fat vs usual diet Control aims: total fat 40%E, SFA 16-18%E, dietary chol 650-750mg/d, P/S 0.4, Intervention aims: F total fat 40%E, SFA no data, dietary chol 350-450mg/d, increased PUFA, P/S 3.0 Control methods: dietary advice to reduce saturated fat and cholesterol (plus 10 follow up visits with nutritionist), purchase of‘usual fat’ items from a trial shop Intervention F methods: dietary advice to reduce saturated fat and cholesterol (plus 10 follow up visits with nutritionist), plus purchase of appropriately reduced and modified fat items from a trial shop Total fat intake (through study): F 35.1 (sd unclear)%E, cont 35.5 (sd unclear)%E Saturated fat intake (through study): F 7.8 (sd unclear)%E, cont 12.0 (sd unclear)%E Style: food provided Setting: community |
|
Outcomes | Stated trial outcomes: lipid levels and dietary assessment Data available on total mortality? no Cardiovascular mortality? yes (none) Events available for combined cardiovascular events: fatal and non-fatal MI, peripheral vascular events Secondary outcomes: cancer diagnoses (none occurred), total and non-fatal MI Tertiary outcomes: none |
|
Notes | ||
Risk of bias | ||
Bias | Authors’ judgement | Support for judgement |
Random sequence generation (selection bias) | Low risk | Stratified randomisation by the statistical centre |
Allocation concealment (selection bias) | Low risk | |
Blinding (performance bias and detection bias) All outcomes |
Low risk | Some participants continued with advice to reduce saturated fat and purchased blinded foods from a trial shop, but half of the participants were instructed in their own purchase of appropriate foods from normal shops to compile their own dietary regimen |
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes |
High risk | Dropouts do not appear to have been followed for death or CV events. Deaths, cancer and CV events for participants otherwise still included in the study were collated as a reason for study exclusion |
Selective reporting (reporting bias) | Low risk | Not relevant for primary and secondary outcomes as all trialists asked for data |
Other bias | Low risk | |
Free of systematic difference in care? | Low risk | Trial shop used by both groups, plus dietary advice. See Control and Intervention Methods in Interventions section of the Table of Characteristics of Included Studies |
Free of dietary differences other than fat? | Low risk | See Control and Intervention Aims in Interventions section of the Table of Characteristics of Included Studies |