Cited by 244Fatty Acid Research and HealthNutritional Studies and DietMental Health Treatment and Access

Dietary n-3 PUFA, fish consumption and depression: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies

Open access
Grosso, Giuseppe, Micek, Agnieszka, Marventano, Stefano, Castellano, Sabrina, Mistretta, Antonio, Pajak, Andrzej, Galvano, Fabio·2016·Journal of Affective Disorders

Abstract

Background Fish consumption and n-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFA) have been hypothesized to exert preventive effects toward depressive disorders, but findings are contrasting. We aimed to systematically review and perform meta-analysis of results from observational studies exploring the association between fish, n-3 PUFA dietary intake, and depression.Methods A search on the main bibliographic source of the observational studies up to August 2015 was performed. Random-effects models of the highest versus the lowest (reference) category of exposure and dose-response meta-analysis were performed.Results A total of 31 studies including 255,076 individuals and over 20,000 cases of depression, were examined. Analysis of 21 datasets investigating relation between fish consumption and depression resulted in significant reduced risk (RR=0.78, 95% CI: 0.69, 0.89), with a linear dose-response despite with moderate heterogeneity. Pooled risk estimates of depression for extreme categories of both total n-3 PUFA and fish-derived n-3 PUFA [eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA)+docosahexaenoic acid (DHA)] resulted in decreased risk for the highest compared with the lowest intake (RR=0.78, 95% CI: 0.67, 0.92 and RR=0.82, 95% CI: 0.73, 0.92, respectively) and dose-response analysis revealed a J-shaped association with a peak decreased risk for 1.8g/d intake of n-3 PUFA (RR=0.30, 95% CI: 0.09, 0.98).Limitation Design of the studies included and confounding due to lack adjustment for certain variables may exist.Conclusions The present analysis supports the hypothesis that dietary n-3 PUFA intake are associated with lower risk of depression.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jad.2016.08.011

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 76 · Cited by 244

Authors
Grosso, G., Micek, A., Marventano, S., Castellano, S., Mistretta, A., Pajak, A., & Galvano, F.
Affiliations
  • Policlinico Universitario di Catania (IT)
  • Jagiellonian University (PL)
  • University of Catania (IT)
Corresponding author
Marventano, Stefano
Venue
Journal of Affective Disorders
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2016-11
Volume
205
Pages
269-281
ISSN
0165-0327 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2509111386
Cited by
244
References
76
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 25 · 2023: 22 · 2022: 28 · 2021: 31 · 2020: 36 · 2019: 28 · 2018: 31 · 2017: 16 · 2016: 2
FWCI
3.45
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Affective Disorders (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Homo Politicus (Academy of Humanities and Economics in Lodz) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Jagiellonian University Repository (Jagiellonian University) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Fatty Acid Research and Health
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Nutritional Studies and Diet
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
Keywords
omega-3 fatty acids, fish consumption, depression, eicosapentaenoic acid, docosahexaenoic acid, dietary intake, dose-response relationship, J-shaped association, depression risk
MeSH terms
Animals, Depressive Disorder, Diet, Fishes, Humans, Risk, Fatty Acids, Omega-3, Prevalence, Observational Studies as Topic

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review