This is the old version of SRDR. The next, SRDRplus is available! Registration of your SRDRPlus account is free and approval is automatic. Click Here to register an SRDRPlus account.

Advanced Search

Study Preview



Study Title and Description

Fish, n-3 fatty acids, and cardiovascular diseases in women of reproductive age: a prospective study in a large national cohort.



Key Questions Addressed
2 Observational studies (longitudinal; quantile or continuous analysis)
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |

Primary Publication Information
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
TitleData
Title Fish, n-3 fatty acids, and cardiovascular diseases in women of reproductive age: a prospective study in a large national cohort.
Author Strøm M., Halldorsson TI., Mortensen EL., Torp-Pedersen C., Olsen SF.
Country Maternal Nutrition Group, Department of Epidemiology Research, Statens Serum Institut, Artillerivej 5, 2300 Copenhagen S, Denmark. mrm@ssi.dk
Year 2012
Numbers Pubmed ID: 22146511

Secondary Publication Information
There are currently no secondary publications defined for this study.


Extraction Form: Observational Studies
Design Details
Question... Follow Up Answer Follow-up Answer
Study Design Observational: Prospective, longitudinal study of intake (eg, FFQ, biomarker)
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Country in which study conducted (where subjects live) Denmark
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Funding source Industry funded
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Eligibility Criteria: Eligible for recruitment were all pregnant women living in Denmark who were fluent in Danish. We excluded women who reported taking fish oil as a supplement during pregnancy. Preeclampsia and gestational diabetes were excluded. finally, questionnaires with a total energy intake <4200 kJ or >16 700 kJ were excluded.
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Study Population Primary Prevention, Healthy
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
At baseline, did all subjects have (per eligibility criteria)...? ... Define: Other ... nd
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Conflict of interest No Data regarding conflict of interest
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Does the study report a subgroup or predictor (regression) analysis for an outcome of interest? No
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
What type(s) of analysis is/are reported? ... Describe Other ... quintiles
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Study start date(s) 1996
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Male, percent 0
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Race nd
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Dropouts, withdrawals, etc. 5354
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
53981
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
9.9
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
missing data
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Baseline characteristics, continuous 29.9
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
skip
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
15.7-46.9
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
nd
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
nd
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
nd
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
nd
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
nd
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
nd
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
nd
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
nd
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
nd
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
n3 Source Diet (Total)
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |




Results & Comparisons

No Results found.

Quality Dimensions
Dimension Value Notes Comments
Selection bias (NOT NESTED CASE CONTROL): Is there clear demonstration that the outcome of interest was not present at the start of the study (baseline)? No Data
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Comparability/Adjustment (ALL OBSERVATIONAL STUDIES): Were the analyses adjusted for confounders (or other factors)? Yes Tabacco use, physical activity, BMI, school, cohabitant status, parity, occupation, prepregnant alcohol intake, total energy intake, intake of saturated fat, dietary fiber, and trans-fatty acids
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Outcome assessment (ALL STUDIES): Were OUTCOME ASSESSORS adequately BLINDED? Yes
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) due to amount, nature or handling of incomplete outcome data (ALL STUDIES) No
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Nutrition, FFQ Baseline intake: Was the dietary assessment instrument (eg, FFQ) described to have measured n-3 FA (ALL STUDIES WITH FFQ)? Yes Measured n-3 FA from ONLY diet
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Nutrition, Baseline data: Were the ranges or distributions of the nutrient exposures adequately reported (ie, quantile means/medians SD and/or ranges) (ALL OBSERVATIONAL STUDIES)? Yes
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Additional Bias: Bias due to problems not covered elsewhere in the table.
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Do any specific outcomes have a high risk of bias (different than others)? If so, describe in Notes.
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |

Quality Rating
No quality rating data was found.