Literature DB >> 26888870

Why do we think we know what we know? A metaknowledge analysis of the salt controversy.

Ludovic Trinquart1, David Merritt Johns2, Sandro Galea3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Although several public health organizations have recommended population-wide reduction in salt intake, the evidence on the population benefits remains unclear. We conducted a metaknowledge analysis of the literature on salt intake and health outcomes.
METHODS: We identified reports--primary studies, systematic reviews, guidelines and comments, letters or reviews--addressing the effect of sodium intake on cerebro-cardiovascular disease or mortality. We classified reports as supportive or contradictory of the hypothesis that salt reduction leads to population benefits, and constructed a network of citations connecting these reports. We tested for citation bias using an exponential random graph model. We also assessed the inclusion of primary studies in systematic reviews on the topic.
RESULTS: We identified 269 reports (25% primary studies, 5% systematic reviews, 4% guidelines and 66% comments, letters, or reviews) from between 1978 and 2014. Of these, 54% were supportive of the hypothesis, 33% were contradictory and 13% were inconclusive. Reports were 1.51 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.38 to 1.65] times more likely to cite reports that drew a similar conclusion, than to cite reports drawing a different conclusion. In all, 48 primary studies were selected for inclusion across 10 systematic reviews. If any given primary study was selected by a review, the probability that a further review would also have selected it was 27.0% (95% CI 20.3% to 33.7%).
CONCLUSIONS: We documented a strong polarization of scientific reports on the link between sodium intake and health outcomes, and a pattern of uncertainty in systematic reviews about what should count as evidence.
© The Author 2016; all rights reserved. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the International Epidemiological Association.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Sodium chloride (dietary); bias (epidemiology); bibliometric analysis; review literature as topic

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26888870     DOI: 10.1093/ije/dyv184

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Epidemiol        ISSN: 0300-5771            Impact factor:   7.196


  25 in total

1.  Dietary Sodium and Cardiovascular Disease Risk--Measurement Matters.

Authors:  Mary E Cogswell; Kristy Mugavero; Barbara A Bowman; Thomas R Frieden
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2016-06-01       Impact factor: 91.245

2.  A Typology of Nonfinancial Conflict in Population Health Research.

Authors:  Sandro Galea
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2018-05       Impact factor: 9.308

Review 3.  Nutrition and Cardiovascular Disease-an Update.

Authors:  Kate J Bowen; Valerie K Sullivan; Penny M Kris-Etherton; Kristina S Petersen
Journal:  Curr Atheroscler Rep       Date:  2018-01-30       Impact factor: 5.113

4.  Social behavioural epistemology and the scientific community.

Authors:  Milind Watve
Journal:  J Genet       Date:  2017-07       Impact factor: 1.166

5.  A Systematic Review of the Sources of Dietary Salt Around the World.

Authors:  Saiuj Bhat; Matti Marklund; Megan E Henry; Lawrence J Appel; Kevin D Croft; Bruce Neal; Jason H Y Wu
Journal:  Adv Nutr       Date:  2020-05-01       Impact factor: 8.701

6.  Misrepresentation and distortion of research in biomedical literature.

Authors:  Isabelle Boutron; Philippe Ravaud
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2018-03-13       Impact factor: 11.205

7.  Perspective: Limiting Dependence on Nonrandomized Studies and Improving Randomized Trials in Human Nutrition Research: Why and How.

Authors:  John F Trepanowski; John P A Ioannidis
Journal:  Adv Nutr       Date:  2018-07-01       Impact factor: 8.701

8.  Paucity of high-quality studies reporting on salt and health outcomes from the science of salt: A regularly updated systematic review of salt and health outcomes (April 2017 to March 2018).

Authors:  Kristina S Petersen; Sarah Rae; Erik Venos; Daniela Malta; Kathy Trieu; Joseph Alvin Santos; Sudhir Raj Thout; Jacqui Webster; Norm R C Campbell; JoAnne Arcand
Journal:  J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich)       Date:  2018-12-27       Impact factor: 3.738

9.  Global, regional, and national comparative risk assessment of 79 behavioural, environmental and occupational, and metabolic risks or clusters of risks, 1990-2015: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2015.

Authors: 
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2016-10-08       Impact factor: 79.321

Review 10.  Impact of quality of research on patient outcomes in the Institute of Medicine 2013 report on dietary sodium.

Authors:  Aaron Lucko; Chelsea Ta Doktorchik; Norm Rc Campbell
Journal:  J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich)       Date:  2018-01-16       Impact factor: 3.738

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.