No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Recent evidence indicates a beneficial effect of Melissa officinalis (MO) intake on several chronic diseases. However, the effects of MO intake have not yet been systematically reviewed. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to evaluate the effect of MO intake and focused on several cardiometabolic outcomes. MEDLINE, Scopus, EMBASE, Web of Science and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched for MO-RCTs evaluating cardiometabolic outcomes. Random-effects meta-analyses estimated the pooled standardized mean differences (SMD) between intervention and control groups. Risk of bias was assessed with the Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing the risk of bias in RCTs. Seven RCTs were finally deemed eligible. MO intake was associated with a reduced total cholesterol (TC) (SMD: −0.26; 95% CI: −0.52, −0.01; I 2 = 13.7%; k = 6) and a reduced systolic blood pressure (SBP) (SMD: −0.56; 95% CI: −0.85, −0.27; I 2 = 00.0%; k = 3). MO intake was not associated with statistically significant changes in triglycerides, low-density lipoprotein, diastolic blood pressure, high sensitivity c-reactive protein levels, fasting blood sugar, HbA1c, insulin or high-density lipoprotein levels. No serious adverse events were reported. The risk of bias was high in a considerable amount of studies. Our study suggests that MO is a safe supplement with beneficial effects on TC and SBP. However, the findings of our study must be seen in the light of major limitations such as a low number of included studies and a serious risk of bias. High-quality RCTs are needed for firm conclusions concerning the effects of MO on cardiometabolic outcomes.

Context Several epidemiological studies have investigated the association between a vegetarian diet and risk of depression, but because of inconsistency between studies, the exact association remains unclear. Objective In this systematic review and meta-analysis, the relationship between vegetarian diets and risk of depression in observational studies was evaluated. Data sources The Medline, Embase, Scopus, ISI Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases were searched from inception through September 1, 2020. Study selection Observational studies were included that examined mean levels of depression and risk for depression in vegetarians compared with nonvegetarians. Data extraction Pooled effect sizes were estimated using the random-effects model and were reported as standardized mean differences or odds ratios (ORs) with their corresponding 95%CIs. Heterogeneity was tested using the I2 statistic. Results Combining 9 effect sizes in this meta-analysis illustrated that adherence to a vegetarian diet was associated with a 53% greater risk of depression compared with that of omnivores (95%CI, 1.14–2.07; I2 = 69.1%). Subgroup analysis of depression risk suggested that results depended on the type of vegetarian diet and country where the study was conducted. For studies that assessed a semivegetarian diet (OR, 1.86; 95%CI, 1.42–2.44; I2 = 35.7%) and those conducted in Europe and the United States (OR, 1.45; 95%CI, 1.06–1.98; I2 = 73.2%), there was a positive association between a vegetarian diet and depression, but in lacto-ovo vegetarians and Asian countries, a null association was found. Comparing mean depression scores showed no evidence of difference between vegetarians and nonvegetarians (n = 16; standardized mean difference, 0.10; 95%CI, –0.01 to 0.21; I2 = 79.1%). Conclusion Vegetarian diet significantly increased depression risk; however, the findings were not robust, and more studies are required to investigate the vegetarian diet and depression association.