28 research outputs found

    J-shaped relationship between habitual coffee consumption and 10-year (2002–2012) cardiovascular disease incidence:the ATTICA study

    Get PDF
    Purpose: The purpose of this work was to evaluate the association between coffee consumption and 10-year cardiovascular disease (CVD) incidence in the ATTICA study, and whether this is modified by the presence or absence of metabolic syndrome (MetS) at baseline. Methods: During 2001–2002, 3042 healthy adults (1514 men and 1528 women) living in the greater area of Athens were voluntarily recruited to the ATTICA study. In 2011–2012, the 10-year follow-up was performed in 2583 participants (15% of the participants were lost to follow-up). Coffee consumption was assessed by a validated food-frequency questionnaire at baseline (abstention, low, moderate, heavy). Incidence of fatal or non-fatal CVD event was recorded using WHO-ICD-10 criteria and MetS was defined by the National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment panel III (revised) criteria. Results: Overall, after controlling for potential CVD risk factors, the multivariate analysis revealed a J-shaped association between daily coffee drinking and the risk for a first CVD event in a 10-year period. Particularly, the odds ratio for low (250 ml/day), compared to abstention, were 0.44 (95% CI 0.29–0.68), 0.49 (95% CI 0.27–0.92) and 2.48 (95% CI 1.56–1.93), respectively. This inverse association was also verified among participants without MetS at baseline, but not among participants with the MetS. Conclusions: These data support the protective effect of drinking moderate quantities of coffee (equivalent to approximately 1–2 cups daily) against CVD incidents. This protective effect was only significant for participants without MetS at baseline

    Quality of Reporting and Study Design of CKD Cohort Studies Assessing Mortality in the Elderly Before and After STROBE:A Systematic Review

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND:The STrengthening the Reporting of OBservational studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement was published in October 2007 to improve quality of reporting of observational studies. The aim of this review was to assess the impact of the STROBE statement on observational study reporting and study design quality in the nephrology literature. STUDY DESIGN:Systematic literature review. SETTING & POPULATION:European and North American, Pre-dialysis Chronic Kidney Disease (CKD) cohort studies. SELECTION CRITERIA FOR STUDIES:Studies assessing the association between CKD and mortality in the elderly (>65 years) published from 1st January 2002 to 31st December 2013 were included, following systematic searching of MEDLINE & EMBASE. PREDICTOR:Time period before and after the publication of the STROBE statement. OUTCOME:Quality of study reporting using the STROBE statement and quality of study design using the Newcastle Ottawa Scale (NOS), Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) and Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) tools. RESULTS:37 papers (11 Pre & 26 Post STROBE) were identified from 3621 potential articles. Only four of the 22 STROBE items and their sub-criteria (objectives reporting, choice of quantitative groups and description of and carrying out sensitivity analysis) showed improvements, with the majority of items showing little change between the period before and after publication of the STROBE statement. Pre- and post-period analysis revealed a Manuscript STROBE score increase (median score 77.8% (Inter-quartile range [IQR], 64.7-82.0) vs 83% (IQR, 78.4-84.9, p = 0.05). There was no change in quality of study design with identical median scores in the two periods for NOS (Manuscript NOS score 88.9), SIGN (Manuscript SIGN score 83.3) and CASP (Manuscript CASP score 91.7) tools. LIMITATIONS:Only 37 Studies from Europe and North America were included from one medical specialty. Assessment of study design largely reliant on good reporting. CONCLUSIONS:This study highlights continuing deficiencies in the reporting of STROBE items and their sub-criteria in cohort studies in nephrology. There was weak evidence of improvement in the overall reporting quality, with no improvement in methodological quality of CKD cohort studies between the period before and after publication of the STROBE statement
    corecore