Effects of spicy food consumption on overweight/obesity, hypertension and blood lipids in China: a meta‐analysis of cross-sectional studies

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

Background and objectives

Effect of spicy food consumption on health has attracted widespread attention in recent years. However, the relationships between spicy food intake and overweight/obesity, hypertension and blood lipid levels remain unclear. A meta-analysis of available observational studies was conducted in order to explore the associations.

Methods

PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library and Web of science databases were searched for studies published up to 10 August 2021 without language limitation. The fixed and random effects models were selected to aggregate the effect sizes and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) in this study.

Results

A total of nine observational studies involving 189,817 participants were included. Results from this meta-analysis showed that the highest category of spicy food intake significantly increased the risk of overweight/obesity (pooled Odds Ratio (OR): 1.17; 95% CI: 1.07, 1.28; P < 0.001), compared with the lowest category of spicy food intake. Conversely, a remarkable negative association was observed between the highest category of spicy food intake and hypertension (pooled OR: 0.87; 95% CI: 0.81, 0.93; P = 0.307). In addition, the highest category of spicy food intake increased the level of low density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) (weighted mean difference (WMD): 0.21; 95% CI: 0.02, 0.39; P = 0.040), and reduced high density lipoprotein cholesterol level (HDL-C) (WMD: -0.06; 95% CI: -0.10, -0.02; P = 0.268) concentrations, but it was not related to total cholesterol (TC) (WMD: 0.09; 95% CI: -0.08, 0.26; P = 0.071) and triglyceride (TG) (WMD: -0.08; 95% CI: -0.19, 0.02; P = 0.333)] levels.

Conclusion

Spicy food intake may have a beneficial effect on hypertension, but adversely affect overweight/obesity, as well as blood lipid levels. However, the results should be interpreted cautiously because the present analyses were based on only observational studies and not intervention studies. More large and high-quality studies in different populations will be needed to verify these associations in the future.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12937-023-00857-6.

Related collections

Most cited references 59

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis.

Julian P T Higgins, Simon G Thompson (2002)

The extent of heterogeneity in a meta-analysis partly determines the difficulty in drawing overall conclusions. This extent may be measured by estimating a between-study variance, but interpretation is then specific to a particular treatment effect metric. A test for the existence of heterogeneity exists, but depends on the number of studies in the meta-analysis. We develop measures of the impact of heterogeneity on a meta-analysis, from mathematical criteria, that are independent of the number of studies and the treatment effect metric. We derive and propose three suitable statistics: H is the square root of the chi2 heterogeneity statistic divided by its degrees of freedom; R is the ratio of the standard error of the underlying mean from a random effects meta-analysis to the standard error of a fixed effect meta-analytic estimate, and I2 is a transformation of (H) that describes the proportion of total variation in study estimates that is due to heterogeneity. We discuss interpretation, interval estimates and other properties of these measures and examine them in five example data sets showing different amounts of heterogeneity. We conclude that H and I2, which can usually be calculated for published meta-analyses, are particularly useful summaries of the impact of heterogeneity. One or both should be presented in published meta-analyses in preference to the test for heterogeneity. Copyright 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

0 comments Cited 5942 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement

David Moher, Alessandro Liberati, Jennifer Tetzlaff … (2012)

David Moher and colleagues introduce PRISMA, an update of the QUOROM guidelines for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses

0 comments Cited 5131 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: not found
Article: not found

Critical evaluation of the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for the assessment of the quality of nonrandomized studies in meta-analyses.

Andreas Stang (2010)

0 comments Cited 4089 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

All references

Author and article information

Contributors

Mei Wang: wmh228113@163.com

Wei Huang: huangwei1212520@163.com

Yong Xu:

ORCID: http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9534-6252

xywyll@swmu.edu.cn

Journal

Journal ID (nlm-ta): Nutr J

Journal ID (iso-abbrev): Nutr J

Title: Nutrition Journal

Publisher: BioMed Central (London )

ISSN (Electronic): 1475-2891

Publication date (Electronic): 8 June 2023

Publication date PMC-release: 8 June 2023

Publication date Collection: 2023

Volume: 22

Electronic Location Identifier: 29

Affiliations

[1 ]Department of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Taikang Sichuan Hospital, Chengdu, 610000 Sichuan China

[2 ]Metabolic Vascular Disease Key Laboratory of Sichuan Province, Luzhou, 646000 Sichuan China

[3 ]Sichuan Clinical Research Center for Nephropathy, Luzhou, 646000 Sichuan China

[4 ]GRID grid.488387.8, Department of Endocrinology and Metabolism, , Affiliated Hospital of Southwest Medical University, ; Luzhou, 646000 Sichuan China

Author information

Yong Xu http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9534-6252

Article

Publisher ID: 857

DOI: 10.1186/s12937-023-00857-6

PMC ID: 10249255

PubMed ID: 37291603

SO-VID: ddf83245-165b-483a-b61f-b58a2942817b

License:

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

History

Date received : 14 September 2021

Date accepted : 25 May 2023

Funding

Funded by: Sichuan Science and Technology Program, Sichuan, China

Award ID: 2023YFS0471

Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100014718, Innovative Research Group Project of the National Natural Science Foundation of China;

Award ID: 81970676

Award ID: U22A20286

Custom metadata

ScienceOpen disciplines: Nutrition & Dietetics

Keywords: spicy food,overweight,obesity,hypertension,blood lipid,meta-analysis

Data availability:

ScienceOpen disciplines: Nutrition & Dietetics

Keywords: spicy food, overweight, obesity, hypertension, blood lipid, meta-analysis

Effects of spicy food consumption on overweight/obesity, hypertension and blood lipids in China: a meta‐analysis of cross-sectional studies

Read this article at

Abstract

Background and objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Supplementary Information

Related collections

Karger: Nutrition and Dietetics

Most cited references 59

Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis.

Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement

Critical evaluation of the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for the assessment of the quality of nonrandomized studies in meta-analyses.

Author and article information

Contributors

Journal

Affiliations

Author information

Article

History

Funding

Categories

Custom metadata

Comments

Comment on this article

Similar content 247

Cited by 2

Most referenced authors 1,096