Search

Objective: This systematic review aimed to investigate the association between dietary inflammatory potential and liver cancer to provide evidence regarding scientific dietary health education. Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Setting: A comprehensive literature review was conducted to identify case–control or cohort studies that involved dietary inflammation index (DII)/empirical dietary inflammation pattern (EDIP) and liver cancer in PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane, and Web of Science databases. Using a combination of DII/EDIP and liver cancer as the search terms, the associations between DII/EDIP and liver cancer were then assessed. Participants: Three case–control studies and two cohort studies were brought into the meta-analysis, with 225 713 enrolled participants. Results: Meta-analysis of categorical variables showed that DII/EDIP in the highest category increased the risk of liver cancer compared to DII/EDIP in the lowest category (relative risk (RR) = 2·35; 95 % CI 1·77, 3·13; P = 0·000) and with low heterogeneity across studies (I2 = 40·8 %, P = 0·119). Meta-analysis of continuous variables showed that significant positive association between liver cancer and DII/EDIP scores (RR = 1·24; 95 % CI 1·09, 1·40; P = 0·001), and no heterogeneity (I² = 0·0 %, P = 0·471). Stratified according to the study design, there was a significant positive association between liver cancer and DII/EDIP scores in both cohort studies (RR = 2·16; 95 % CI 1·51, 3·07; P = 0·000) and case–control studies (RR = 2·75; 95 % CI 1·71, 4·41; P = 0·000). Conclusion: The higher the DII/EDIP score, the higher the risk of liver cancer. This finding may have prominent implications for the general population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Health inequities such as chronic disease are significantly higher among individuals living with disadvantage compared with the general population and many are reported to be attributable to preventable dietary risk factors. This study provides an overview of the current nutrition interventions for individuals living with extreme disadvantage, in supported residential settings, to develop insights into the development and implementation of policies and practices to promote long-term nutritional health and well-being.Design: A scoping review searched Scopus, ProQuest, CINAHL Plus, MEDLINE, and Web of Science databases using the terms 'resident', 'nutrition', 'disadvantage', 'intervention' and their synonyms, with particular emphasis on interventions in residential settings.Setting: Residential services providing nutrition provision and support.Participants: People experiencing extreme disadvantage.Results: From 5262 articles, seven were included in final synthesis. Most interventions focused on building food literacy knowledge and skills. Study designs and outcome measures varied; however, all reported descriptive improvements in behaviour and motivation. In addition to food literacy, it was suggested that interventions need to address behaviour and motivations, programme sustainability, long-term social, physical and economic barriers and provide support for participants during transition into independent living. Socio-economic issues remain key barriers to long-term health and well-being.Conclusions: In addition to food literacy education, future research and interventions should consider utilising an academic-community partnership, addressing nutrition-related mental health challenges, motivation and behaviour change and a phased approach to improve support for individuals transitioning into independent living. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]