The Effect of the Menstrual Cycle on Energy Intake: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

IF 5.9 2区 医学 Q1 NUTRITION & DIETETICS Nutrition reviews Pub Date : 2024-07-15 DOI:10.1093/nutrit/nuae093
Jessica A L Tucker, Seth F McCarthy, Derek P D Bornath, Jenna S Khoja, Tom J Hazell
{"title":"The Effect of the Menstrual Cycle on Energy Intake: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.","authors":"Jessica A L Tucker, Seth F McCarthy, Derek P D Bornath, Jenna S Khoja, Tom J Hazell","doi":"10.1093/nutrit/nuae093","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Context: </strong>Energy intake may differ across the menstrual cycle, with some studies identifying greater energy intake in the luteal phase (LP) compared with the follicular phase (FP) and others finding no clear differences. To date, no study has systematically synthesized the available data to draw more definite conclusions while considering any methodological inconsistencies between studies.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>The aim was to conduct a systematic review/meta-analysis in an effort to determine if there are differences in energy intake between the FP and LP.</p><p><strong>Data sources: </strong>A systematic search strategy was developed and the search was conducted in 5 databases for studies that investigated any changes in energy intake across menstrual phases.</p><p><strong>Data extraction: </strong>Using Covidence, studies were identified and included if they contained individuals between the ages of 18 and 45 years, maintained an average body mass index (BMI) of 18.5-25 kg/m2, had no history of disordered eating, and included energy intake and menstrual cycle measurements in the FP and LP.</p><p><strong>Data analysis: </strong>Effect sizes were calculated for each study and a random-effects model was used to pool the results of each study.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Fifteen datasets were included consisting of 330 female participants with a mean age of 26 ± 4 years and mean BMI of 22.4 ± 2.3 kg/m2. Overall, there was a statistically significant difference (standardized mean difference = 0.69; P = .039) with increased energy intake in the LP compared with the FP (crude 168 kcal⋅d-1 average difference between phases).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Energy intake was found to be greater in the LP compared with the FP, providing insight into the effect of the menstrual cycle on energy intake. However, there were repeated methodological inconsistencies and future work should strive to utilize best practices for both energy intake measurement and menstrual phase specification.</p>","PeriodicalId":19469,"journal":{"name":"Nutrition reviews","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nutrition reviews","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/nutrit/nuae093","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NUTRITION & DIETETICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Context: Energy intake may differ across the menstrual cycle, with some studies identifying greater energy intake in the luteal phase (LP) compared with the follicular phase (FP) and others finding no clear differences. To date, no study has systematically synthesized the available data to draw more definite conclusions while considering any methodological inconsistencies between studies.

Objective: The aim was to conduct a systematic review/meta-analysis in an effort to determine if there are differences in energy intake between the FP and LP.

Data sources: A systematic search strategy was developed and the search was conducted in 5 databases for studies that investigated any changes in energy intake across menstrual phases.

Data extraction: Using Covidence, studies were identified and included if they contained individuals between the ages of 18 and 45 years, maintained an average body mass index (BMI) of 18.5-25 kg/m2, had no history of disordered eating, and included energy intake and menstrual cycle measurements in the FP and LP.

Data analysis: Effect sizes were calculated for each study and a random-effects model was used to pool the results of each study.

Results: Fifteen datasets were included consisting of 330 female participants with a mean age of 26 ± 4 years and mean BMI of 22.4 ± 2.3 kg/m2. Overall, there was a statistically significant difference (standardized mean difference = 0.69; P = .039) with increased energy intake in the LP compared with the FP (crude 168 kcal⋅d-1 average difference between phases).

Conclusion: Energy intake was found to be greater in the LP compared with the FP, providing insight into the effect of the menstrual cycle on energy intake. However, there were repeated methodological inconsistencies and future work should strive to utilize best practices for both energy intake measurement and menstrual phase specification.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
月经周期对能量摄入的影响:系统回顾与元分析》。
背景:不同月经周期的能量摄入量可能有所不同,一些研究发现黄体期(LP)与卵泡期(FP)相比能量摄入量更大,而另一些研究则未发现明显差异。迄今为止,还没有研究对现有数据进行系统综合,以得出更明确的结论,同时考虑到不同研究在方法上的不一致:目的:进行系统回顾/元分析,以确定 FP 和 LP 的能量摄入是否存在差异:数据提取:使用 Covidence 方法,如果研究对象年龄在 18-45 岁之间,平均体重指数(BMI)在 18.5-25 kg/m2 之间,无饮食紊乱史,并在 FP 和 LP 中包含能量摄入和月经周期测量结果,则将其纳入研究:数据分析:计算每项研究的效应大小,并使用随机效应模型汇总每项研究的结果:共纳入 15 个数据集,包括 330 名女性参与者,平均年龄为 26 ± 4 岁,平均体重指数为 22.4 ± 2.3 kg/m2。总体而言,与 FP 相比,LP 的能量摄入量增加,差异有统计学意义(标准化平均差异 = 0.69;P = .039)(各阶段之间的平均差异为 168 千卡-d-1):结论:与 FP 相比,LP 阶段的能量摄入量更大,这有助于了解月经周期对能量摄入量的影响。然而,在方法上反复出现了不一致的情况,今后的工作应努力采用最佳方法来测量能量摄入量和确定月经期。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Nutrition reviews
Nutrition reviews 医学-营养学
CiteScore
12.20
自引率
1.60%
发文量
121
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Nutrition Reviews is a highly cited, monthly, international, peer-reviewed journal that specializes in the publication of authoritative and critical literature reviews on current and emerging topics in nutrition science, food science, clinical nutrition, and nutrition policy. Readers of Nutrition Reviews include nutrition scientists, biomedical researchers, clinical and dietetic practitioners, and advanced students of nutrition.
期刊最新文献
Fiber intake and fiber intervention in depression and anxiety: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies and randomized controlled trials. Effects of carnosine and histidine-containing dipeptides on biomarkers of inflammation and oxidative stress: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Effects of intermittent fasting combined with physical exercise on cardiometabolic outcomes: systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical studies. Energy and nutrient intake by people with and without sarcopenia diagnosed by the European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Impact of ketogenic diet on cardiovascular disease.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1