Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 160

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Dietary Protein and Blood Pressure: A Systematic Review

Open access
Altorf – van der Kuil, Wieke, Engberink, Mariëlle F., Brink, Elizabeth J., van Baak, Marleen A., Bakker, Stephan J. L., Navis, Gerjan, van 't Veer, Pieter, Geleijnse, Johanna M.·2010·PLoS ONE

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Elevated blood pressure (BP), which is a major risk factor for cardiovascular disease, is highly prevalent worldwide. Recently, interest has grown in the role of dietary protein in human BP. We performed a systematic review of all published scientific literature on dietary protein, including protein from various sources, in relation to human BP. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: We performed a MEDLINE search and a manual search to identify English language studies on the association between protein and blood pressure, published before June 2010. A total of 46 papers met the inclusion criteria. Most observational studies showed no association or an inverse association between total dietary protein and BP or incident hypertension. Results of biomarker studies and randomized controlled trials indicated a beneficial effect of protein on BP. This beneficial effect may be mainly driven by plant protein, according to results in observational studies. Data on protein from specific sources (e.g. from fish, dairy, grain, soy, and nut) were scarce. There was some evidence that BP in people with elevated BP and/or older age could be more sensitive to dietary protein. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: In conclusion, evidence suggests a small beneficial effect of protein on BP, especially for plant protein. A blood pressure lowering effect of protein may have important public health implications. However, this warrants further investigation in randomized controlled trials. Furthermore, more data are needed on protein from specific sources in relation to BP, and on the protein-BP relation in population subgroups.

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 · 10.1371/journal.pone.0012102

Cites

4 of 4 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 4 references

Cited by

See all 160

Metadata

Authors
Altorf – van der Kuil, W., Engberink, M. F., Brink, E. J., van Baak, M. A., Bakker, S. J. L., Navis, G., van 't Veer, P., & Geleijnse, J. M.
Venue
PLoS ONE
Published
2010-08-11
Volume
5
Issue
8
Pages
e12102
ISSN
1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2154495279
Cited by
160
References
4
FWCI
2.17
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Dietary Protein and Blood Pressure: A Systematic Review. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1371/journal.pone.0012102
The paper
Altorf – van der Kuil, W., Engberink, M. F., Brink, E. J., van Baak, M. A., Bakker, S. J. L., Navis, G., van 't Veer, P., & Geleijnse, J. M. (2010). Dietary Protein and Blood Pressure: A Systematic Review. PLoS ONE. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0012102

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.