European journal of nutrition · 2022
Protein-rich food intake and risk of spontaneous abortion: a prospective cohort study.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Wesselink Amelia K, Willis Sydney K, Laursen Anne Sofie Dam, Mikkelsen Ellen M, Wang Tanran R, Trolle Ellen, Tucker Katherine L, Rothman Kenneth J, Wise Lauren A, Hatch Elizabeth E
Аннотация
PURPOSE: Diet quality is increasingly recognized as important for human reproductive capacity. We studied the association between intake of protein-rich foods and risk of spontaneous abortion (SAB).
METHODS: During 2013-2020, we recruited pregnancy planners from the United States and Canada (Pregnancy Study Online; PRESTO) and Denmark (SnartForaeldre.dk; SF). Participants completed a baseline questionnaire and a validated cohort-specific food frequency questionnaire. We estimated preconception intake of red meat, poultry, processed meat, seafood, eggs, plant-based proteins, and dairy from individual foods and mixed recipes. We included 4,246 PRESTO and 2,953 SF participants who reported a pregnancy during the study. Data on SAB were derived from questionnaires and population registries. We used Cox proportional hazards regression to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CI), representing the effect of substituting one type of protein-rich food for another.
RESULTS: SAB risk was 23% in PRESTO and 16% in SF. In PRESTO, substitution of seafood with other protein-rich foods was associated with higher SAB risk [for example, the HR for replacing 100 g of seafood/week with 100 g of red meat was 1.10 (95% CI 1.00, 1.20)]. In contrast, in SF, substituting seafood with other protein-rich foods was associated with lower SAB risk [HR for replacing 100 g of seafood/week with 100 g of red meat was 0.89 (95% CI 0.82, 0.98)]. Other protein-rich food substitutions were not meaningfully associated with SAB risk.
CONCLUSIONS: Preconception intake of protein-rich foods was largely unrelated to SAB risk, with the exception of seafood, which was associated with higher risk of SAB in Denmark, but a lower risk in North America.
METHODS: During 2013-2020, we recruited pregnancy planners from the United States and Canada (Pregnancy Study Online; PRESTO) and Denmark (SnartForaeldre.dk; SF). Participants completed a baseline questionnaire and a validated cohort-specific food frequency questionnaire. We estimated preconception intake of red meat, poultry, processed meat, seafood, eggs, plant-based proteins, and dairy from individual foods and mixed recipes. We included 4,246 PRESTO and 2,953 SF participants who reported a pregnancy during the study. Data on SAB were derived from questionnaires and population registries. We used Cox proportional hazards regression to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CI), representing the effect of substituting one type of protein-rich food for another.
RESULTS: SAB risk was 23% in PRESTO and 16% in SF. In PRESTO, substitution of seafood with other protein-rich foods was associated with higher SAB risk [for example, the HR for replacing 100 g of seafood/week with 100 g of red meat was 1.10 (95% CI 1.00, 1.20)]. In contrast, in SF, substituting seafood with other protein-rich foods was associated with lower SAB risk [HR for replacing 100 g of seafood/week with 100 g of red meat was 0.89 (95% CI 0.82, 0.98)]. Other protein-rich food substitutions were not meaningfully associated with SAB risk.
CONCLUSIONS: Preconception intake of protein-rich foods was largely unrelated to SAB risk, with the exception of seafood, which was associated with higher risk of SAB in Denmark, but a lower risk in North America.