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

Higher erythrocyte n-3 PUFAs are associated with decreased blood pressure in middle-aged and elderly Chinese adults.



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

Primary Publication Information
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
TitleData
Title Higher erythrocyte n-3 PUFAs are associated with decreased blood pressure in middle-aged and elderly Chinese adults.
Author Zeng FF., Sun LL., Liu YH., Xu Y., Guan K., Ling WH., Chen YM.
Country Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Food, Nutrition, and Health, School of Public Health, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China.
Year 2014
Numbers Pubmed ID: 24966412

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
    ) |
What is the name of this study? (e.g. DART, Physician's Health Study) Guangzhou
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Country in which study conducted (where subjects live) ... Specify Other(s) [Separate countries with commas]: ... China
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Funding source No industry relationship reported (funding or affiliations reported)
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Eligibility Criteria: Aged 40–75y who had been Guangzhou residents for at least 5y. Excluded participants with confirmed chronic diseases such as diabetes, CVDs, liver or renal failure, or cancer (n = 184), and those who were using antihypertensive therapy at baseline (n = 248), had missing erythrocyte FA values (n = 894), or had missing BP measurements (n = 2).
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Study Population Primary Prevention, Healthy
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Conflict of interest No conflict of interest (explicitly stated)
  • 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? Baseline biomarker level vs. outcomes
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Quantiles of baseline measures
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Study start date(s) 2008
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Male, percent 25.3%
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Race nd
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Dropouts, withdrawals, etc. 357
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
1834
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
19.5
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
refusal to participate, lost contact or emigration, serious diseases or death, missing BP data
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Baseline characteristics, continuous 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
    ) |
nd
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Baseline Diseases/Conditions 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
    ) |
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)? Yes
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Comparability/Adjustment (ALL OBSERVATIONAL STUDIES): Were the analyses adjusted for confounders (or other factors)? Yes Including diet but not CVD risk factors
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Outcome assessment (ALL STUDIES): Were OUTCOME ASSESSORS adequately BLINDED? Low
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) due to amount, nature or handling of incomplete outcome data (ALL STUDIES) Low
  • 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)? Not Applicable
  • 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. No
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Do any specific outcomes have a high risk of bias (different than others)? If so, describe in Notes. No
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |

Quality Rating
No quality rating data was found.