TABLE 1.
Refined grain intake and relative risk of CVD, CHD, stroke, hypertension, heart failure, T2D, cancer, and all-cause mortality: results from meta-analyses of prospective cohort studies1
| Highest vs lowest intakes | Dose response2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Meta-analysis reference | Number of cohorts included | Relative risk (95% CI) | Number of cohorts included | Relative risk (95% CI) | Outcome |
| Aune et al. (2) | 4 | 1.16 (0.84, 1.59) | 5 | 1.13 (0.90, 1.42) | CHD |
| Aune et al. (2) | 2 | 1.02 (0.91, 1.14) | 3 | 0.98 (0.90, 1.06) | CVD |
| Bechthold et al. (4) | 5 | 1.11 (0.99, 1.25) | 4 | 1.01 (0.99, 1.04) | CHD |
| Mellen et al. (5) | 3 | 1.07 (0.94, 1.22) | — | — | CVD |
| Chen et al. (20)3 | 8 | 1.09 (1.01, 1.19) | — | — | CVD/CHD/MI |
| Aune et al. (2) | 4 | 0.95 (0.78, 1.14) | 5 | 0.91 (0.81, 1.02) | Stroke |
| Bechthold et al. (4) | 6 | 1.02 (0.94, 1.11) | 4 | 1.00 (0.98, 1.01) | Stroke |
| Chen et al. (33) | 5 | 0.99 (0.84, 1.16) | 5 | 0.95 (0.86, 1.03) | Stroke |
| Wu et al. (34) | 10 | 1.02 (0.93, 1.10) | 10 | 0.98 (0.93, 1.03) | Stroke |
| Schwingshackl et al. (35) | 3 | 0.95 (0.88, 1.03) | 3 | 0.99 (0.96, 1.02) | Hypertension |
| Bechthold et al. (4) | 1 | 0.83 (0.58, 1.19) | 1 | 0.86 (0.68, 1.09) | Heart failure |
| Aune et al. (3) | 6 | 0.94 (0.82, 1.09) | 6 | 0.95 (0.88, 1.04) | T2D |
| Schwingshackl et al. (13) | 15 | 1.01 (0.92, 1.10) | 14 | 1.01 (0.99, 1.03) | T2D |
| Aune et al. (2) | 1 | 0.98 (0.82, 1.16) | 2 | 0.94 (0.90, 0.99) | Total cancer |
| Schwingshackl et al. (36) | 2 | 1.27 (1.02, 1.57) | — | — | Colon cancer |
| Schwingshackl et al. (36) | 1 | 0.82 (0.48, 1.40) | — | — | Rectal cancer |
| Schwingshackl et al. (36) | 2 | 1.46 (0.80, 2.67) | — | — | Colorectal cancer |
| Aune et al. (2) | 2 | 1.02 (0.93, 1.12) | 4 | 0.95 (0.91, 0.99) | All-cause mortality |
| Schwingshackl et al. (6) | 4 | 0.99 (0.94, 1.05) | 4 | 0.99 (0.97, 1.01) | All-cause mortality |
1
CHD, coronary heart disease; CVD, cardiovascular disease; MI, myocardial infarction; T2D, type 2 diabetes.
2
In dose-response analyses, relative risks are per 90 g/d in Aune et al. (2, 3) and Chen et al. (20); and per 30 g/d in Bechthold et al. (4) and Schwingshackl et al. (6, 13, 35).
3
In this meta-analysis an incorrect outcome variable (metabolic syndrome rather than CHD) was used for one of the studies (27) included in the meta-analysis. See text for discussion.