Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 273

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 8 of the 8 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Fruit and vegetable intake and type 2 diabetes: EPIC-InterAct prospective study and meta-analysis

Open access
Cooper, A J, Forouhi, N G, Ye, Z, Buijsse, B, Arriola, L, Balkau, B, Barricarte, A, Beulens, J W J, Boeing, H, Büchner, F L, Dahm, C C, de Lauzon-Guillain, B, Fagherazzi, G, Franks, P W, Gonzalez, C, Grioni, S, Kaaks, R, Key, T J, Masala, G, Navarro, C, Nilsson, P, Overvad, K, Panico, S, Ramón Quirós, J, Rolandsson, O, Roswall, N, Sacerdote, C, Sánchez, M-J, Slimani, N, Sluijs, I, Spijkerman, A M W, Teucher, B, Tjonneland, A, Tumino, R, Sharp, S J, Langenberg, C, Feskens, E J M, Riboli, E, Wareham, N J, The InterAct Consortium·2012·European Journal of Clinical Nutrition
DOI 10.1038/ejcn.2012.85
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Fruit and vegetable intake (FVI) may reduce the risk of type 2 diabetes (T2D), but the epidemiological evidence is inconclusive. The aim of this study is to examine the prospective association of FVI with T2D and conduct an updated meta-analysis. In the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer-InterAct (EPIC-InterAct) prospective case–cohort study nested within eight European countries, a representative sample of 16 154 participants and 12 403 incident cases of T2D were identified from 340 234 individuals with 3.99 million person-years of follow-up. For the meta-analysis we identified prospective studies on FVI and T2D risk by systematic searches of MEDLINE and EMBASE until April 2011. In EPIC-InterAct, estimated FVI by dietary questionnaires varied more than twofold between countries. In adjusted analyses the hazard ratio (95% confidence interval) comparing the highest with lowest quartile of reported intake was 0.90 (0.80–1.01) for FVI; 0.89 (0.76–1.04) for fruit and 0.94 (0.84–1.05) for vegetables. Among FV subtypes, only root vegetables were inversely associated with diabetes 0.87 (0.77–0.99). In meta-analysis using pooled data from five studies including EPIC-InterAct, comparing the highest with lowest category for FVI was associated with a lower relative risk of diabetes (0.93 (0.87–1.00)). Fruit or vegetables separately were not associated with diabetes. Among FV subtypes, only green leafy vegetable (GLV) intake (relative risk: 0.84 (0.74–0.94)) was inversely associated with diabetes. Subtypes of vegetables, such as root vegetables or GLVs may be beneficial for the prevention of diabetes, while total FVI may exert a weaker overall effect.

Overview

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 · 10.1038/ejcn.2012.85

Cites

8 of 8 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

Show all 8 references

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Cooper, A. J., Forouhi, N. G., Ye, Z., Buijsse, B., Arriola, L., Balkau, B., Barricarte, A., Beulens, J. W. J., Boeing, H., Büchner, F. L., Dahm, C. C., de Lauzon-Guillain, B., Fagherazzi, G., Franks, P. W., Gonzalez, C., Grioni, S., Kaaks, R., Key, T. J., Masala, G., Navarro, C., Nilsson, P., Overvad, K., Panico, S., Ramón Quirós, J., Rolandsson, O., Roswall, N., Sacerdote, C., Sánchez, M.-J., Slimani, N., Sluijs, I., Spijkerman, A. M. W., Teucher, B., Tjonneland, A., Tumino, R., Sharp, S. J., Langenberg, C., Feskens, E. J. M., Riboli, E., Wareham, N. J., & The InterAct Consortium
Venue
European Journal of Clinical Nutrition
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2012-08-01
Volume
66
Issue
10
Pages
1082-1092
ISSN
  • 0954-3007 (ISSN-L)
  • 1476-5640
DOI
10.1038/ejcn.2012.85
OpenAlex
W2014838352
Cited by
273
References
8
FWCI
19.68
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.