Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 4 de 4
Filtrar
1.
Nat Commun ; 15(1): 1082, 2024 Feb 05.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38316758

RESUMO

Chewing tobacco use poses serious health risks; yet it has not received as much attention as other tobacco-related products. This study synthesizes existing evidence regarding the health impacts of chewing tobacco while accounting for various sources of uncertainty. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of chewing tobacco and seven health outcomes, drawing on 103 studies published from 1970 to 2023. We use a Burden of Proof meta-analysis to generate conservative risk estimates and find weak-to-moderate evidence that tobacco chewers have an increased risk of stroke, lip and oral cavity cancer, esophageal cancer, nasopharynx cancer, other pharynx cancer, and laryngeal cancer. We additionally find insufficient evidence of an association between chewing tobacco and ischemic heart disease. Our findings highlight a need for policy makers, researchers, and communities at risk to devote greater attention to chewing tobacco by both advancing tobacco control efforts and investing in strengthening the existing evidence base.


Assuntos
Neoplasias Esofágicas , Neoplasias Laríngeas , Neoplasias Bucais , Tabaco sem Fumaça , Humanos , Tabaco sem Fumaça/efeitos adversos , Neoplasias Bucais/epidemiologia , Neoplasias Bucais/etiologia
2.
Nat Med ; 30(1): 149-167, 2024 Jan.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38195750

RESUMO

Despite a gradual decline in smoking rates over time, exposure to secondhand smoke (SHS) continues to cause harm to nonsmokers, who are disproportionately children and women living in low- and middle-income countries. We comprehensively reviewed the literature published by July 2022 concerning the adverse impacts of SHS exposure on nine health outcomes. Following, we quantified each exposure-response association accounting for various sources of uncertainty and evaluated the strength of the evidence supporting our analyses using the Burden of Proof Risk Function methodology. We found all nine health outcomes to be associated with SHS exposure. We conservatively estimated that SHS increases the risk of ischemic heart disease, stroke, type 2 diabetes and lung cancer by at least around 8%, 5%, 1% and 1%, respectively, with the evidence supporting these harmful associations rated as weak (two stars). The evidence supporting the harmful associations between SHS and otitis media, asthma, lower respiratory infections, breast cancer and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease was weaker (one star). Despite the weak underlying evidence for these associations, our results reinforce the harmful effects of SHS on health and the need to prioritize advancing efforts to reduce active and passive smoking through a combination of public health policies and education initiatives.


Assuntos
Asma , Neoplasias da Mama , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2 , Infecções Respiratórias , Poluição por Fumaça de Tabaco , Criança , Humanos , Feminino , Poluição por Fumaça de Tabaco/efeitos adversos
3.
Nat Med ; 28(10): 2075-2082, 2022 Oct.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36216940

RESUMO

Characterizing the potential health effects of exposure to risk factors such as red meat consumption is essential to inform health policy and practice. Previous meta-analyses evaluating the effects of red meat intake have generated mixed findings and do not formally assess evidence strength. Here, we conducted a systematic review and implemented a meta-regression-relaxing conventional log-linearity assumptions and incorporating between-study heterogeneity-to evaluate the relationships between unprocessed red meat consumption and six potential health outcomes. We found weak evidence of association between unprocessed red meat consumption and colorectal cancer, breast cancer, type 2 diabetes and ischemic heart disease. Moreover, we found no evidence of an association between unprocessed red meat and ischemic stroke or hemorrhagic stroke. We also found that while risk for the six outcomes in our analysis combined was minimized at 0 g unprocessed red meat intake per day, the 95% uncertainty interval that incorporated between-study heterogeneity was very wide: from 0-200 g d-1. While there is some evidence that eating unprocessed red meat is associated with increased risk of disease incidence and mortality, it is weak and insufficient to make stronger or more conclusive recommendations. More rigorous, well-powered research is needed to better understand and quantify the relationship between consumption of unprocessed red meat and chronic disease.


Assuntos
Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2 , Carne Vermelha , Doença Crônica , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/epidemiologia , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/etiologia , Dieta/efeitos adversos , Humanos , Carne/efeitos adversos , Carne Vermelha/efeitos adversos , Fatores de Risco
4.
Nat Med ; 28(10): 2045-2055, 2022 10.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36216941

RESUMO

As a leading behavioral risk factor for numerous health outcomes, smoking is a major ongoing public health challenge. Although evidence on the health effects of smoking has been widely reported, few attempts have evaluated the dose-response relationship between smoking and a diverse range of health outcomes systematically and comprehensively. In the present study, we re-estimated the dose-response relationships between current smoking and 36 health outcomes by conducting systematic reviews up to 31 May 2022, employing a meta-analytic method that incorporates between-study heterogeneity into estimates of uncertainty. Among the 36 selected outcomes, 8 had strong-to-very-strong evidence of an association with smoking, 21 had weak-to-moderate evidence of association and 7 had no evidence of association. By overcoming many of the limitations of traditional meta-analyses, our approach provides comprehensive, up-to-date and easy-to-use estimates of the evidence on the health effects of smoking. These estimates provide important information for tobacco control advocates, policy makers, researchers, physicians, smokers and the public.


Assuntos
Abandono do Hábito de Fumar , Fumar , Projetos de Pesquisa , Fatores de Risco , Fumar/efeitos adversos , Fumar/epidemiologia
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA