Your privacy, your choice

We use essential cookies to make sure the site can function. We also use optional cookies for advertising, personalisation of content, usage analysis, and social media.

By accepting optional cookies, you consent to the processing of your personal data - including transfers to third parties. Some third parties are outside of the European Economic Area, with varying standards of data protection.

See our privacy policy for more information on the use of your personal data.

for further information and to change your choices.
Skip to main content

Table 1 Overview of main results for binary outcomes

From: Evaluating agreement between individual nutrition randomised controlled trials and cohort studies - a meta-epidemiological study

 

Pairs included

Ratio of risk ratios

(95% CI)

Heterogeneity

(I2 (%); τ2)

95% prediction interval

Main analysis

54

1.00 (0.91 to 1.10)

43; 0.05

0.64 to 1.56

 Stratified by dietary intervention/exposure

  (Micro-)nutrients

37

1.04 (0.93 to 1.17)

44; 0.05

0.65 to 1.65

  Dietary pattern

13

0.93 (0.74 to 1.17)

46; 0.08

0.48 to 1.80

  Foods group

4

0.95 (0.83 to 1.09)

23; 0.01

0.60 to 1.50

 Stratified by type of intake

  Intake

21

0.94 (0.80 to 1.10)

48; 0.06

0.54 to 1.64

  Supplementation

33

1.04 (0.93 to 1.16)

40; 0.04

0.70 to 1.56

 Stratified by outcome

  Cancer

18

1.08 (0.89 to 1.31)

31; 0.06

0.61 to 1.91

  Cardiovascular disease

10

1.06 (0.87 to 1.27)

59; 0.06

0.58 to 1.93

  Pregnancy outcomes

11

0.79 (0.60 to 1.05)

1; 0.001

0.57 to 1.10

  Endocrine/metabolic disease

7

0.90 (0.71 to 1.14)

50; 0.05

0.46 to 1.76

  All-cause mortality

4

0.93 (0.70 to 1.24)

14; 0.01

0.42 to 2.04

  Eye disease

3

1.12 (0.66 to 1.88)

76; 0.17

0.00 to 552.31

  Fractures

1

0.91 (0.83 to 0.98)

NA

NA

 Stratified by overall PI/ECO similarity degree

  More or less identical

10

1.06 (0.86 to 1.31)

41; 0.06

0.57 to 1.96

  Similar but not identical

39

0.96 (0.87 to 1.06)

38; 0.03

0.67 to 1.38

  Broadly similar

5

1.36 (0.85 to 2.15)

70; 0.18

0.29 to 6.30

 Stratified by risk-of-bias rating (rating in RCT vs. in cohort studies)a

  Low risk vs. some concerns

6

1.27 (0.99 to 1.64)

56; 0.04

0.66 to 2.45

  Low risk vs. high risk

10

1.00 (0.85 to 1.18)

36; 0.03

0.63 to 1.59

  Some concerns vs. some concerns

19

0.98 (0.85 to 1.13)

47; 0.05

0.60 to 1.60

  Some concerns vs. high risk

13

0.90 (0.68 to 1.19)

44; 0.10

0.43 to 1.91

  Some concerns vs. very high risk

2

1.10 (0.11 to 10.52)

42; 1.18

NA

  High risk vs. some concerns

1

0.87 (0.60 to 1.28)

NA

NA

  High risk vs. high risk

2

0.98 (0.51 to 1.86)

0; 0

NA

  High risk vs. very high risk

1

2.96 (0.14 to 61.35)

NA

NA

  1. CI confidence interval, NA not applicable, PI/ECO population, intervention or exposure, comparator, outcome, RCT randomised controlled trial
  2. aNo study pairs were available for comparing low risk vs. low risk, low risk vs. very high risk, some concerns vs. low risk, and high risk vs. low risk
Back to article page

BMC Medicine

ISSN: 1741-7015

Contact us