Fruit and vegetable intake and incidence of type 2 diabetes mellitus: systematic review and meta-analysis
By P. Carter, L. Gray, J. Troughton, Kamlesh Khunti, M. Davies. British medical journal, 2010
743 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Objective To investigate the independent effects of intake of fruit and vegetables on incidence of type 2 diabetes. Design Systematic review and meta-analysis. Data sources Medline, Embase, CINAHL, British Nursing Index (BNI), and the Cochrane library were searched for medical subject headings and keywords on diabetes, prediabetes, fruit, and vegetables. Expert opinions were sought and reference lists of relevant articles checked. Study selection Prospective cohort studies with an independent measure of intake of fruit, vegetables, or fruit and vegetables and data on incidence of type 2 diabetes. Results Six studies met the inclusion criteria; four of these studies also provided separate information on the consumption of green leafy vegetables. Summary estimates showed that greater intake of green leafy vegetables was associated with a 14% (hazard ratio 0.86, 95% confidence interval 0.77 to 0.97) reduction in risk of type 2 diabetes (P=0.01). The summary estimates showed no significant benefits of increasing the consumption of vegetables, fruit, or fruit and vegetables combined. Conclusion Increasing daily intake of green leafy vegetables could significantly reduce the risk of type 2 diabetes and should be investigated further.
Subfields: Biochemistry, Ecology, Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/d2052e13a0ee443b61392c5ba6831c6fd9752105
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Ecology
In Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
Citations in the corpus
- Critical review: vegetables and fruit in the prevention of chronic diseases (2012, methodology): “In another meta-analysis [37], 2 more recent cohort studies were included, but one study that was included into the meta-analysis by Hamer and Chida was not considered.”