为什么只有一些队列研究发现低量饮酒有益健康?对可能导致死亡风险估计偏差的研究特征进行系统回顾和荟萃分析。

IF 2.4 3区 医学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY Journal of studies on alcohol and drugs Pub Date : 2024-07-01 Epub Date: 2024-01-30 DOI:10.15288/jsad.23-00283
Tim Stockwell, Jinhui Zhao, James Clay, Christine Levesque, Nitika Sanger, Adam Sherk, Timothy Naimi
{"title":"为什么只有一些队列研究发现低量饮酒有益健康?对可能导致死亡风险估计偏差的研究特征进行系统回顾和荟萃分析。","authors":"Tim Stockwell, Jinhui Zhao, James Clay, Christine Levesque, Nitika Sanger, Adam Sherk, Timothy Naimi","doi":"10.15288/jsad.23-00283","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Assumptions about alcohol's health benefits profoundly influence global disease burden estimates and drinking guidelines. Using theory and evidence, we identify and test study characteristics that may bias estimates of all-cause mortality risk associated with low-volume drinking.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>We identified 107 longitudinal studies by systematic review with 724 estimates of the association between alcohol consumption and all-cause mortality for 4,838,825 participants with 425,564 recorded deaths. \"Higher-quality\" studies had a mean cohort age of 55 years or younger, followed up beyond 55 years, and excluded former and occasional drinkers from abstainer reference groups. \"Low-volume\" alcohol use was defined as between one drink per week (>1.30 g ethanol/day) and two drinks per day (<25 g ethanol/ day). Mixed linear regression was used to model relative risks (RRs) of mortality for subgroups of higher- versus lower-quality studies.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>As predicted, studies with younger cohorts and separating former and occasional drinkers from abstainers estimated similar mortality risk for low-volume drinkers (RR = 0.98, 95% CI [0.87, 1.11]) as abstainers. Studies not meeting these quality criteria estimated significantly lower risk for low-volume drinkers (RR = 0.84, [0.79, 0.89]). In exploratory analyses, studies controlling for smoking and/or socioeconomic status had significantly reduced mortality risks for low-volume drinkers. However, mean RR estimates for low-volume drinkers in nonsmoking cohorts were above 1.0 (RR = 1.16, [0.91, 1.41]).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Studies with lifetime selection biases may create misleading positive health associations. These biases pervade the field of alcohol epidemiology and can confuse communications about health risks. Future research should investigate whether smoking status mediates, moderates, or confounds alcohol-mortality risk relationships.</p>","PeriodicalId":17159,"journal":{"name":"Journal of studies on alcohol and drugs","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Why Do Only Some Cohort Studies Find Health Benefits From Low-Volume Alcohol Use? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Study Characteristics That May Bias Mortality Risk Estimates.\",\"authors\":\"Tim Stockwell, Jinhui Zhao, James Clay, Christine Levesque, Nitika Sanger, Adam Sherk, Timothy Naimi\",\"doi\":\"10.15288/jsad.23-00283\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Assumptions about alcohol's health benefits profoundly influence global disease burden estimates and drinking guidelines. Using theory and evidence, we identify and test study characteristics that may bias estimates of all-cause mortality risk associated with low-volume drinking.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>We identified 107 longitudinal studies by systematic review with 724 estimates of the association between alcohol consumption and all-cause mortality for 4,838,825 participants with 425,564 recorded deaths. \\\"Higher-quality\\\" studies had a mean cohort age of 55 years or younger, followed up beyond 55 years, and excluded former and occasional drinkers from abstainer reference groups. \\\"Low-volume\\\" alcohol use was defined as between one drink per week (>1.30 g ethanol/day) and two drinks per day (<25 g ethanol/ day). Mixed linear regression was used to model relative risks (RRs) of mortality for subgroups of higher- versus lower-quality studies.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>As predicted, studies with younger cohorts and separating former and occasional drinkers from abstainers estimated similar mortality risk for low-volume drinkers (RR = 0.98, 95% CI [0.87, 1.11]) as abstainers. Studies not meeting these quality criteria estimated significantly lower risk for low-volume drinkers (RR = 0.84, [0.79, 0.89]). In exploratory analyses, studies controlling for smoking and/or socioeconomic status had significantly reduced mortality risks for low-volume drinkers. However, mean RR estimates for low-volume drinkers in nonsmoking cohorts were above 1.0 (RR = 1.16, [0.91, 1.41]).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Studies with lifetime selection biases may create misleading positive health associations. These biases pervade the field of alcohol epidemiology and can confuse communications about health risks. Future research should investigate whether smoking status mediates, moderates, or confounds alcohol-mortality risk relationships.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":17159,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of studies on alcohol and drugs\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of studies on alcohol and drugs\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.15288/jsad.23-00283\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/30 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of studies on alcohol and drugs","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15288/jsad.23-00283","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/30 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:关于酒精对健康有益的假设深刻影响着全球疾病负担的估计和饮酒指南。利用理论和证据,我们确定并检验了可能使低量饮酒相关全因死亡率风险估计值出现偏差的研究特征:我们通过系统回顾的方式确定了 107 项纵向研究,其中 724 项研究估计了 4,838,825 名参与者的饮酒量与全因死亡率之间的关系,死亡记录为 425,564 例。"质量较高的 "研究的平均队列年龄≤55岁,随访时间超过55年,并将曾经饮酒者和偶尔饮酒者排除在戒酒参考组之外。"低量 "饮酒被定义为每周饮酒一杯(乙醇含量大于 1.30 克/天)至每天饮酒两杯(结果:正如预测的那样,队列较年轻、将曾经饮酒者和偶尔饮酒者与戒酒者分开的研究估计,低量饮酒者的死亡风险(RR=0.98,0.87-1.11)与戒酒者相似。不符合这些质量标准的研究估计低容量饮酒者的风险明显较低(RR=0.84,0.79-0.89)。在探索性分析中,控制吸烟和/或社会经济状况的研究显著降低了低容量饮酒者的死亡风险。然而,非吸烟队列中低饮酒量者的平均RR估计值高于1.0(RR=1.16,0.91-1.41):存在终生选择偏差的研究可能会产生误导性的积极健康关联。这些偏差普遍存在于酒精流行病学领域,可能会混淆有关健康风险的交流。未来的研究应调查吸烟状况是调解、调节还是混淆酒精与死亡风险之间的关系。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Why Do Only Some Cohort Studies Find Health Benefits From Low-Volume Alcohol Use? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Study Characteristics That May Bias Mortality Risk Estimates.

Objective: Assumptions about alcohol's health benefits profoundly influence global disease burden estimates and drinking guidelines. Using theory and evidence, we identify and test study characteristics that may bias estimates of all-cause mortality risk associated with low-volume drinking.

Method: We identified 107 longitudinal studies by systematic review with 724 estimates of the association between alcohol consumption and all-cause mortality for 4,838,825 participants with 425,564 recorded deaths. "Higher-quality" studies had a mean cohort age of 55 years or younger, followed up beyond 55 years, and excluded former and occasional drinkers from abstainer reference groups. "Low-volume" alcohol use was defined as between one drink per week (>1.30 g ethanol/day) and two drinks per day (<25 g ethanol/ day). Mixed linear regression was used to model relative risks (RRs) of mortality for subgroups of higher- versus lower-quality studies.

Results: As predicted, studies with younger cohorts and separating former and occasional drinkers from abstainers estimated similar mortality risk for low-volume drinkers (RR = 0.98, 95% CI [0.87, 1.11]) as abstainers. Studies not meeting these quality criteria estimated significantly lower risk for low-volume drinkers (RR = 0.84, [0.79, 0.89]). In exploratory analyses, studies controlling for smoking and/or socioeconomic status had significantly reduced mortality risks for low-volume drinkers. However, mean RR estimates for low-volume drinkers in nonsmoking cohorts were above 1.0 (RR = 1.16, [0.91, 1.41]).

Conclusions: Studies with lifetime selection biases may create misleading positive health associations. These biases pervade the field of alcohol epidemiology and can confuse communications about health risks. Future research should investigate whether smoking status mediates, moderates, or confounds alcohol-mortality risk relationships.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
5.90%
发文量
224
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs began in 1940 as the Quarterly Journal of Studies on Alcohol. It was founded by Howard W. Haggard, M.D., director of Yale University’s Laboratory of Applied Physiology. Dr. Haggard was a physiologist studying the effects of alcohol on the body, and he started the Journal as a way to publish the increasing amount of research on alcohol use, abuse, and treatment that emerged from Yale and other institutions in the years following the repeal of Prohibition in 1933. In addition to original research, the Journal also published abstracts summarizing other published documents dealing with alcohol. At Yale, Dr. Haggard built a large team of alcohol researchers within the Laboratory of Applied Physiology—including E.M. Jellinek, who became managing editor of the Journal in 1941. In 1943, to bring together the various alcohol research projects conducted by the Laboratory, Dr. Haggard formed the Section of Studies on Alcohol, which also became home to the Journal and its editorial staff. In 1950, the Section was renamed the Center of Alcohol Studies.
期刊最新文献
Age differences in cannabis-related perceptions, knowledge, and sources of information among adults in the post-legalization era in Quebec, Canada. Parenteral Buprenorphine for Opioid Withdrawal. Prior Sexual Aggression as a Moderator of an Integrated Alcohol and Sexual Assault Prevention Program for Heavy Drinking College Men: A Brief Report. Trends in Cannabis-related Hospitalizations in Arizona from 2016-2021 and Associations with Mental Health-related Hospitalizations. The public deserves better: A critique based on 40 years as an alcohol research consumer.
×
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