The Effect of Nephelium longata L Honeyconsumption on Decreasing of Cholesterol Level for Hypercholesterolemia Patient at Medical Clinic of Farras Husada of Sowan Lor, Kedung, Jepara

The effect of honey on lipid profiles: a systematic review and meta-analysis of controlled clinical trials

“…The publication date for these studies ranged from 1988 to 2020. The studies were done in Iran (n 6) (15,(21)(22)(23)(24)(25) , USA (n 2) (16,26) , Malaysia (n 3) (27)(28)(29) , Indonesia (n 2) (30,31) , Pakistan (n 2) (32,33) , Turkey (n 1) (34) , New Zealand (n 1) (35) , Egypt (n 1) (36) , Germany (n 1) (37) , Nigeria (n 1) (38) , Dubai (n 1) (39) , Saudi Arabia (n 1) (40) and Greece (n 1) (41) . The studies were performed on healthy, overweight, obese, glucose-intolerant and hyperlipidaemic participants, diabetics (type 2, type 1 and nephropathy diabetics), postmenopausal women, individuals undergoing elective surgery and asymptomatic treatment-naïve HIV-infected patients.…”

“…Among the included trials, five used a crossover design, while eighteen followed a controlled parallel design. One study was only conducted on females (30) , three were only performed on males (22,32,33) and the remaining nineteen included both sexes. BMI ranged from 21 to 36 kg/m 2 , while this measure was not mentioned in seven studies (24,30,(32)(33)(34)39,40) .…”

“…One study was only conducted on females (30) , three were only performed on males (22,32,33) and the remaining nineteen included both sexes. BMI ranged from 21 to 36 kg/m 2 , while this measure was not mentioned in seven studies (24,30,(32)(33)(34)39,40) . Moreover, various types of honey, such as natural, native and formulated, as well as honey vinegar were tested.…”

“…As shown in Table 2, except for four studies (27,30,31,38) that did not perform randomisation and their quality assessment was done separately according to the ROBINS-I tool (Table 3), randomisation was done in the rest of studies and, consequently, they were regarded as having a low risk of bias. Concealment was mentioned in one study (21) , which was regarded as having a low (2015) (35) New Zealand Type risk of bias in allocation concealment.…”

“…As shown in Table 3, in case of bias due to confounding and bias in selection of the reported results, two of the studies had a moderate risk of bias (30,38) and two others had a low risk of bias (27,31) . Considering bias in selection of participants, bias in classification of interventions and bias due to deviations from the intended interventions, the information given for all four studies was insufficient.…”