Skip to main content
. 2017 Mar 16;2017(3):CD011114. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011114.pub2

Jacques 1995.

Methods RCT of parallel group design.
Participants 155 participants (men and women, 20 to 65 years old) were recruited and screened between December 1989 and September 1991 from two sources in Boston. Employees of a large manufacturing complex were recruited by work site posters and presentations, and Boston area residents were recruited by printed advertisements.
Exclusion criteria:
· Age ˂ 20 or > 65 years
· Plasma ascorbic acid > 80 µmol/L for men or > 90 µmol/L for women
· HDL cholesterol > 1.4 mmol/L for men or >1.7 mmol/L for women
· Total cholesterol > 6.7 mmol/L
· Body mass index > 31 kg/m2 for men or > 33 kg/m2 for women
· Current smokers
· History of diabetes, heart disease or liver disease
· Vitamin C supplement use (> 60 mg/day) within the last 3 months
· Use of lipid altering medication
· On a weight modifying diet
Interventions Intervention (n = 80): 2 x 500 mg vitamin C tablets per day (one each morning and one each evening) for 8 months.
Control (n = 75): 2 x placebo tablets per day (one each morning and one each evening) for 8 months.
Outcomes Total cholesterol, LDL cholesterol, HDL cholesterol, triglycerides.
Notes Funding: commercial and non‐commercial (Hoffman‐La Roche and US Department of Agriculture).
Risk of bias
Bias Authors' judgement Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias) Unclear risk Not stated.
Allocation concealment (selection bias) Unclear risk Not stated.
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) 
 All outcomes Low risk States "double‐blind" but provide no further details.
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) 
 All outcomes Unclear risk Not stated.
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) 
 All outcomes Low risk Numbers lost to follow‐up provided, and reasons for exclusions provided.
Selective reporting (reporting bias) Low risk All outcomes reported as specified.
Other bias Unclear risk Insufficient information to judge
Non‐commercial and commercial funding. Authors did state that the content of the study does not necessarily represent the views of the US Department of Agriculture.