Cited by 264Tea Polyphenols and EffectsCoffee research and impactsNutritional Studies and Diet

Green and Black Tea Consumption and Risk of Stroke: A Meta-Analysis

Arab, Lenore, Liu, Weiqing, Elashoff, David·2009·Stroke

Abstract

Background and Purpose— Experimental models of stroke provide consistent evidence of smaller stroke volumes in animals ingesting tea components or tea extracts. To assess whether a similar association of black or green tea consumption with reduced risk is evident in human populations, we sought to identify and summarize all human clinical and observational data on tea and stroke. Methods— We searched PubMed and Web of Science for all studies on stroke and tea consumption in humans with original data, including estimation or measurement of tea consumption and outcomes of fatal or nonfatal stroke. Data from 9 studies involving 4378 strokes among 194 965 individuals were pooled. The main outcome was the occurrence of fatal or nonfatal stroke. We tested for heterogeneity and calculated the summary effect estimate associated with consumption of ≥3 cups of tea (green or black) per day using random-effects and fixed-effects models for the homogeneous studies. Publication bias was also evaluated. Results— Regardless of their country of origin, individuals consuming ≥3 cups of tea per day had a 21% lower risk of stroke than those consuming <1 cup per day (absolute risk reduction, 0.79; CI, 0.73 to 0.85). The proportion of heterogeneity not explained by chance alone was 23.8%. Conclusions— Although a randomized clinical trial would be necessary to confirm the effect, this meta-analysis suggests that daily consumption of either green or black tea equaling 3 cups per day could prevent the onset of ischemic stroke.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1161/strokeaha.108.538470

Cites

48 of 48 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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?

  • One meta-analysis (Arab et al., 2009) of tea consumption and stroke risk found similar results.

    “One meta-analysis (Arab et al., 2009) of prospective cohort studies which assessed the relationship between green and black tea consumption and the risk of stroke and included data from nine individual studies involving 4 378 strokes among 194 965 individuals in total found similar results.”

    From Scientific Opinion on the safety of caffeine (2015) · cites this paper as Arab et al., 2009

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Arab, L., Liu, W., & Elashoff, D.
Affiliations
University of California, Los Angeles (US)
Venue
Stroke
Published
2009-05
Volume
40
Issue
5
Pages
1786-1792
ISSN
  • 0039-2499 (ISSN-L)
  • 1524-4628
OpenAlex
W2100046156
Cited by
264
References
48
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 20 · 2014: 28 · 2013: 37 · 2012: 29
FWCI
14.69
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Stroke (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pathology and Forensic Medicine › Tea Polyphenols and Effects
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Coffee research and impacts
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Nutritional Studies and Diet
Keywords
green tea, black tea, tea consumption, stroke risk, ischemic stroke, stroke prevention, stroke volume, tea polyphenols
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Cross-Sectional Studies, Data Interpretation, Statistical, Feeding Behavior, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Tea, Cohort Studies, Case-Control Studies, Risk Assessment, Stroke, Endpoint Determination, Asian People

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