Cited by 379Cholesterol and Lipid MetabolismLipoproteins and Cardiovascular HealthNatural Products and Biological Research

LDL-cholesterol-lowering effect of plant sterols and stanols across different dose ranges: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled studies

Open access
Ras, Rouyanne T., Geleijnse, Johanna M., Trautwein, Elke A.·2014·British Journal of Nutrition

Abstract

Phytosterols (PS, comprising plant sterols and plant stanols) have been proven to lower LDL-cholesterol concentrations. The dose–response relationship for this effect has been evaluated in several meta-analyses by calculating averages for different dose ranges or by applying continuous dose–response functions. Both approaches have advantages and disadvantages. So far, the calculation of averages for different dose ranges has not been done for plant sterols and stanols separately. The objective of the present meta-analysis was to investigate the combined and separate effects of plant sterols and stanols when classified into different dose ranges. Studies were searched and selected based on predefined criteria. Relevant data were extracted. Average LDL-cholesterol effects were calculated when studies were categorised by dose, according to random-effects models while using the variance as weighing factor. This was done for plant sterols and stanols combined and separately. In total, 124 studies (201 strata) were included. Plant sterols and stanols were administered in 129 and fifty-nine strata, respectively; the remaining used a mix of both. The average PS dose was 2·1 (range 0·2–9·0) g/d. PS intakes of 0·6–3·3 g/d were found to gradually reduce LDL-cholesterol concentrations by, on average, 6–12 %. When plant sterols and stanols were analysed separately, clear and comparable dose–response relationships were observed. Studies carried out with PS doses exceeding 4 g/d were not pooled, as these were scarce and scattered across a wide range of doses. In conclusion, the LDL-cholesterol-lowering effect of both plant sterols and stanols continues to increase up to intakes of approximately 3 g/d to an average effect of 12 %.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s0007114514000750

Cites

31 of 31 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ras, R. T., Geleijnse, J. M., & Trautwein, E. A.
Affiliations
  • Unilever Research and Development Vlaardingen (NL)
  • Wageningen University & Research (NL)
Corresponding author
Ras, Rouyanne T.
Venue
British Journal of Nutrition
Published
2014-04-30
Volume
112
Issue
2
Pages
214-219
ISSN
  • 0007-1145 (ISSN-L)
  • 1475-2662
OpenAlex
W2145483967
Cited by
379
References
31
Citations by year
2026: 22 · 2025: 17 · 2024: 20 · 2023: 36 · 2022: 31 · 2021: 42 · 2020: 43 · 2019: 41 · 2018: 34 · 2017: 32 · 2016: 31 · 2015: 26 · 2014: 2
FWCI
5.72
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • British Journal Of Nutrition (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Socio-Environmental Systems Modeling (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Cholesterol and Lipid Metabolism
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Lipoproteins and Cardiovascular Health
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Natural Products and Biological Research
Keywords
phytosterols, plant stanols, LDL cholesterol, dose-response relationship, cholesterol-lowering effect, dietary supplementation, hypercholesterolemia, dose range
MeSH terms
Adult, Anticholesteremic Agents, Humans, Hypercholesterolemia, Cholesterol, LDL, Phytosterols, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Evidence-Based Medicine, Dietary Supplements, Functional Food

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