| Literature DB >> 34778593 |
Gabriela Amorim Pereira1, Alessandra da Silva2, Helen Hermana M Hermsdorff2, Ana Paula Boroni Moreira3, Aline Silva de Aguiar3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIM: We aimed to systematically review observational studies that evaluated the potential association of the dietary total antioxidant capacity (dTAC) with common mental disorders (depression and anxiety) and sleep disorders.Entities:
Keywords: antioxidants; common mental disorders; dietary total antioxidant capacity; mental health; nutrition
Year: 2021 PMID: 34778593 PMCID: PMC8580524
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Clin Transl Res ISSN: 2382-6533
Figure 1Stages of identification, inclusion, and exclusion of articles in the review
Characteristics of the seven studies included in the systematic review
| Authors/Year of publication/Country | Sample characteristics | Objective of the study | Methodology | Adjustment variables | Main results |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Abshirini | n: 400 postmenopausal women (adults and older adults) | To assess the association between dTAC and menopausal symptoms in postmenopausal middle-aged women | Assay: ORAC | Age, educational level, waist circumference, physical activity, use of dietary supplements, fiber, tea, coffee, and energy intake | •Higher ORAC quartile was associated with lower chance of anxiety symptoms, sleep problems, irritability, exhaustion/difficulty concentrating |
| Abshirini | n: 175 postmenopausal women (adults and older adults) | To evaluate the association between dTAC with scores of depression, stress, anxiety, and oxidative stress in postmenopausal women | Assay: ORAC | Age, time of menopause; education level, waist circumference, physical activity, use of dietary supplements, fiber, energy, and coffee intake | • Inverse association between ORAC and depression and anxiety scores |
| Daneshzad | n: 265 type 2 diabetic women (adults and older adults) | To evaluate the association between dTAC with sleep, stress, anxiety, and depression in women | Assay: ORAC and FRAP | Age, BMI, energy intake, physical activity, blood pressure, medication, supplement consumption, socioeconomic classification, nap times, hours of night sleep | •Higher tertile of FRAP and ORAC was associated with lower chances of sleeping poorly, of depressive symptoms and stress |
| Milajerdi | n: 3.297 men and women, apparently healthy adults | Investigate the association between dTAC and depression and anxiety among Iranian adults | Essay: FRAP | Age, sex, energy consumption, marital status, socioeconomic status, smoking, presence of chronic conditions, physical activity, use of supplements, antidepressant medication use, intake of omega-3 fatty acids and BMI | Higher FRAP quintile was associated with lower chance of higher depression and anxiety scores |
| Miki | n: 911 men and women (youth, adults, and older adults) | To assess the association of dTAC and the incidence of depressive symptoms in Japanese workers | Assay: ORAC and FRAP | Age, sex, marital status, degree of employment, night work or on a rotating shift, overtime work, Job strain, physical activity at work, household chores, commuting, or leisure, smoking; BMI, consumption of alcohol, total energy intake, antioxidant supplement use, intake of folate, vitamin B6, vitamin B12, n-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids, magnesium, and zinc, and CES-D score | Absence of association between ORAC and FRAP with incidence of depressive symptoms |
| Oliveira | n: 41 climacteric women | To evaluate the possible relationship between dTAC and polyphenol intake and depression in climacteric women | Assay: VCAC | No adjustment | Absence of difference in average VCAC values in women with depression or no |
| Prohan | n: 60 men (young) | To evaluate associations between dTAC and serum CAT with depression scales in young university students | Essay: TEAC and FRAP | No adjustment | Absence of difference in the average values of TEAC and FRAP between cases and controls |
Did not assess association through regression analyzes, dTAC: Dietary total antioxidant capacity; n: Sample size; BMI: Body mass index; ORAC: Oxygen radical absorbance capacity; FRAP: Ferric reducing ability of plasma; VCAC: Vitamin C equivalent antioxidant capacity; TEAC: Trolox equivalent antioxidant capacity; CES-D: center for epidemiologic studies depression scale
Quality assessment of cross-sectional and cohort studies
| Study | Questions | Overall rating | |||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||||||||||||||
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | ||
| Daneshzad | Y | Y | N | Y | N | N | N | Y | Y | N | Y | N | N | Y | Fair |
| Abshirini | Y | Y | N | Y | N | N | N | Y | Y | N | Y | N | N | Y | Fair |
| Abshirini | Y | Y | N | Y | N | N | N | Y | Y | N | Y | N | N | Y | Fair |
| Oliveira | Y | Y | N | Y | N | N | N | Y | Y | N | N | N | N | N | Poor |
| Milajerdi | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | N | N | Y | Y | N | Y | N | N | Y | Good |
| Miki | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | Y | N | N | Y | Good |
| Legends: Y: Yes; N: No: Not applicable, not reported, not possible to determine. | |||||||||||||||
| Questions | |||||||||||||||
| 1. Was the research question or objective in this paper clearly stated? | |||||||||||||||
| 2. Was the study population clearly specified and defined? | |||||||||||||||
| 3. Was the participation rate of eligible persons at least 50%? | |||||||||||||||
| 4. Were all the subjects selected or recruited from the same or similar populations (including the same time period)? Were inclusion and exclusion criteria for being in the study prespecified and applied uniformly to all participants? | |||||||||||||||
| 5. Was a sample size justification, power description, or variance and effect estimates provided? | |||||||||||||||
| 6. For the analyses in this paper, were the exposure (s) of interest measured prior to the outcome (s) being measured? | |||||||||||||||
| 7. Was the timeframe sufficient so that one could reasonably expect to see an association between exposure and outcome if it existed? | |||||||||||||||
| 8. For exposures that can vary in amount or level, did the study examine different levels of the exposure as related to the outcome (e.g., categories of exposure, or exposure measured as continuous variable)? | |||||||||||||||
| 9. Were the exposure measures (independent variables) clearly defined, valid, reliable, and implemented consistently across all study participants? | |||||||||||||||
| 10. Was the exposure (s) assessed more than once over time? | |||||||||||||||
| 11. Were the outcome measures (dependent variables) clearly defined, valid, reliable, and implemented consistently across all study participants? | |||||||||||||||
| 12. Were the outcome assessors blinded to the exposure status of participants? | |||||||||||||||
| 13. Was loss to follow-up after baseline 20% or less? | |||||||||||||||
| 14. Were key potential confounding variables measured and adjusted statistically for their impact on the relationship between exposure (s) and outcome (s)? | |||||||||||||||
Quality assessment of cross-sectional and cohort studies
| Study | Questions | Overall rating | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||||||||||||
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | ||
| Prohan | Y | Y | N | Y | Y | Y | N | Y | N | Y | N | N | Poor |
| Legends: Y: Yes; N: No: Not applicable, not reported, not possible to determine. | |||||||||||||
| Questions | |||||||||||||
| 1. Was the research question or objective in this paper clearly stated and appropriate? | |||||||||||||
| 2. Was the study population clearly specified and defined? | |||||||||||||
| 3. Did the authors include a sample size justification? | |||||||||||||
| 4. Were controls selected or recruited from the same or similar population that gave rise to the cases (including the same timeframe)? | |||||||||||||
| 5. Were the definitions, inclusion and exclusion criteria, algorithms or processes used to identify or select cases and controls valid, reliable, and implemented consistently across all study participants? | |||||||||||||
| 6. Were the cases clearly defined and differentiated from controls? | |||||||||||||
| 7. If less than 100 percent of eligible cases and/or controls were selected for the study, were the cases and/or controls randomly selected from those eligible? | |||||||||||||
| 8. Was there use of concurrent controls? | |||||||||||||
| 9. Were the investigators able to confirm that the exposure/risk occurred prior to the development of the condition or event that defined a participant as a case? | |||||||||||||
| 10. Were the measures of exposure/risk clearly defined, valid, reliable, and implemented consistently (including the same time period) across all study participants? | |||||||||||||
| 11. Were the assessors of exposure/risk blinded to the case or control status of participants? | |||||||||||||
| 12. Were key potential confounding variables measured and adjusted statistically in the analyses? If matching was used, did the investigators account for matching during study analysis? | |||||||||||||
Figure 2Figure summary of the four studies that observed a significant relationship between the total antioxidant capacity of the diet (dietary total antioxidant capacity) and the outcomes evaluated in this systematic review. Legend: ↓ = low, ↑ high, dashed lines = cancel the effect.