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":" ","pages":"441-452"},"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\":\" \",\"pages\":\"441-452\"},\"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}
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.
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.