Context: Vegetarian and vegan diets are increasing in popularity. Although they provide beneficial health effects, they may also lead to nutritional deficiencies. Cognitive impairment and mental health disorders have a high economic burden.Objective: A meta-analysis was conducted to examine the relationship between vegan or vegetarian diets and cognitive and mental health.Data Sources: PubMed, Scopus, ScienceDirect, and Proquest databases were examined from inception to July 2018.Study Selection: Original observational or interventional human studies of vegan/vegetarian diets were selected independently by 2 authors.Data Extraction: Raw means and standard deviations were used as continuous outcomes, while numbers of events were used as categorical outcomes.Results: Of 1249 publications identified, 13 were included, with 17 809 individuals in total. No significant association was found between diet and the continuous depression score, stress, well-being, or cognitive impairment. Vegans/vegetarians were at increased risk for depression (odds ratio = 2.142; 95%CI, 1.105–4.148) and had lower anxiety scores (mean difference = −0.847; 95%CI, −1.677 to −0.018). Heterogeneity was large, and thus subgroup analyses showed numerous differences.Conclusions: Vegan or vegetarian diets were related to a higher risk of depression and lower anxiety scores, but no differences for other outcomes were found. Subgroup analyses of anxiety showed a higher risk of anxiety, mainly in participants under 26 years of age and in studies with a higher quality. More studies with better overall quality are needed to make clear positive or negative associations.Systematic Review Registration: PROSPERO registration no. CRD42018097204

The lack of cognitive activity accelerates age cognitive decline. Cognitive stimulation (CS) tries to enhance cognitive functioning. The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the effects of CS on cognitive outcomes (general cognitive functioning and specific cognitive domains) in older adults (aged 65 years or older, cognitively healthy participants, or with mild cognitive impairment, or dementia). PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science databases were examined from inception to October 2021. A total of 1,997 studies were identified in these databases, and. 33 studies were finally included in the systematic review and the meta-analysis. Raw means and standard deviations were used for continuous outcomes. Publication bias was examined by Egger's Regression Test for Funnel Plot Asymmetry and the quality assessment tools from the National Institutes of Health. CS significantly improves general cognitive functioning (mean difference=MD = 1.536, 95%CI, 0.832 to 2.240), memory (MD = 0.365, 95%CI, 0.300 to 0.430), orientation (MD = 0.428, 95%CI, 0.306 to 0.550), praxis (MD = 0.278, 95%CI, 0.094 to 0.462) and calculation (MD = 0.228, 95%CI, 0.112 to 0.343). CS seems to increase general cognitive functioning, memory, orientation, praxis, and calculation in older adults.

Dietary risks are leading contributors to global morbidity and mortality and disproportionately burden individuals of lower socioeconomic positions. The aim of this review is to understand, holistically, what factors are perceived to influence healthy eating and to determine whether perceived factors differ when comparing the general population with lower socioeconomic subgroups. Four academic databases (MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library) and 3 gray literature databases were searched systematically, along with reference lists. Studies were included if they were qualitative and were conducted with community-dwelling adults in high-income countries and if they focused specifically on healthy eating. Eligibility was determined through author consensus. Thirty-nine eligible studies (of 11 641 records screened) were identified. Study characteristics were extracted using a standard template, and quality appraisal was conducted using the Critical Appraisal Skills Program tool. Data synthesis was conducted using meta-ethnography, with themes categorized according to the socioecological model. Factors across the individual, social, lived, and food environments were perceived to influence healthy eating. Meta-ethnography revealed that multiple environmental and social factors were frequently reported as barriers to healthy eating. While factors were largely generalizable, diet affordability and the lower availability of stores offering healthy food appeared to be more salient barriers for lower socioeconomic groups. Actions to improve population diets should mitigate the barriers to healthy eating to create environments that support healthy eating across the socioeconomic gradient. Systematic Review Registration: PROSPERO registration number CRD42017065243.

The microbiome has been hypothesized to play a role in cancer development. Because of the diversity of published data, an overview of available epidemiologic evidence linking the microbiome with cancer is now needed. We conducted a systematic review using a tailored search strategy in Medline and EMBASE databases to identify and summarize the current epidemiologic literature on the relationship between the microbiome and different cancer outcomes published until December 2019. We identified 124 eligible articles. The large diversity of parameters used to describe microbial composition made it impossible to harmonize the different studies in a way that would allow meta-analysis, therefore only a qualitative description of results could be performed. Fifty studies reported differences in the gut microbiome between patients with colorectal cancer and various control groups. The most consistent findings were for Fusobacterium, Porphyromonas, and Peptostreptococcus being significantly enriched in fecal and mucosal samples from patients with colorectal cancer. For the oral microbiome, significantly increased and decreased abundance was reported for Fusobacterium and Streptococcus, respectively, in patients with oral cancer compared with controls. Overall, although there was a large amount of evidence for some of these alterations, most require validation in high-quality, preferably prospective, epidemiologic studies.

Addressing social disadvantages that lead to obesity should be a public health priority. Obesity prevalence among children and adolescents has reached a plateau in countries with a high income but it continues rising in low-income and middle-income countries. In high-income countries, an elevated prevalence of obesity is found among racial and ethnic minority groups and individuals from disadvantaged socio-economic backgrounds. In addition to classical socio-economic status (SES) factors, like income, parental education and occupation, recent publications have linked parental social disadvantages, such as minimal social network, non-traditional family structure, migrant status and unemployment, with obesogenic behaviors and obesity among children. Socio ecological models of obesity in children can explain the influence of classical SES factors, social disadvantages, culture and genes on behaviors that could lead to obesity, contributing to the elevated prevalence of obesity. Obesity is a multifactorial disease in which multilevel interventions seem to be the most effective approach to prevent obesity in children, but previous meta-analyses have found that multilevel interventions had poor or inconsistent results. Despite these results, some multilevel interventions addressing specific disadvantaged social groups have shown beneficial effects on children´s weight and energy balance-related behaviors, while other interventions have benefited children from both disadvantaged and non-disadvantaged backgrounds. Considering obesity as a worldwide problem, the World Health Organization, the European Commission and the National Institutes of Health recommend the implementation of obesity prevention programs but the implementation of such programs without taking into consideration social disadvantages may be an unsuccessful approach. Therefore, the present publication consists of a review of the pertinent literature related to social disadvantage and its consequences for behaviors that could lead to childhood obesity. In addition, we will discuss the relationship between social disadvantages and the socio ecological model of obesity in children. Finally, we will summarize the relevant aspects of multilevel intervention programs aiming to prevent obesity in children and provide recommendations for future research and intervention approaches to improve weight status in children with social disadvantages.