Angeliki Papadaki

Dr. Angeliki Papadaki

University of Bristol
+1
orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

25Years (2002-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
25 November 2010 in New England Journal of Medicine
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
TLThomas Meinert Larsen
Thomas Meinert Larsen
SDStine-Mathilde Dalskov
Stine-Mathilde Dalskov
Marleen Van BaakMarleen Van Baak
Marleen Van Baak
SJSusan A. Jebb
Susan A. Jebb
Angeliki PapadakiAngeliki Papadaki
Angeliki Papadaki
AAArne Astrup
Arne Astrup
Studies of weight-control diets that are high in protein or low in glycemic index have reached varied conclusions, probably owing to the fact that the studies had insufficient power. We enrolled overweight adults from eight European countries who had lost at least 8% of their initial body weight with a 3.3-MJ (800-kcal) low-calorie diet. Participants were randomly assigned, in a two-by-two factorial design, to one of five ad libitum diets to prevent weight regain over a 26-week period: a low-protein and low-glycemic-index diet, a low-protein and high-glycemic-index diet, a high-protein and low-glycemic-index diet, a high-protein and high-glycemic-index diet, or a control diet. A total of 1209 adults were screened (mean age, 41 years; body-mass index [the weight in kilograms divided by the square of the height in meters], 34), of whom 938 entered the low-calorie-diet phase of the study. A total of 773 participants who completed that phase were randomly assigned to one of the five maintenance diets; 548 completed the intervention (71%). Fewer participants in the high-protein and the low-glycemic-index groups than in the low-protein–high-glycemic-index group dropped out of the study (26.4% and 25.6%, respectively, vs. 37.4%; P=0.02 and P=0.01 for the respective comparisons). The mean initial weight loss with the low-calorie diet was 11.0 kg. In the analysis of participants who completed the study, only the low-protein–high-glycemic-index diet was associated with subsequent significant weight regain (1.67 kg; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.48 to 2.87). In an intention-to-treat analysis, the weight regain was 0.93 kg less (95% CI, 0.31 to 1.55) in the groups assigned to a high-protein diet than in those assigned to a low-protein diet (P=0.003) and 0.95 kg less (95% CI, 0.33 to 1.57) in the groups assigned to a low-glycemic-index diet than in those assigned to a high-glycemic-index diet (P=0.003). The analysis involving participants who completed the intervention produced similar results. The groups did not differ significantly with respect to diet-related adverse events. In this large European study, a modest increase in protein content and a modest reduction in the glycemic index led to an improvement in study completion and maintenance of weight loss. (Funded by the European Commission; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00390637.)

1 July 2007 in Appetite
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
Angeliki PapadakiAngeliki Papadaki
Angeliki Papadaki
GHGeorge Hondros
George Hondros
Jane ScottJane Scott
Jane Scott
MKMaria Kapsokefalou
Maria Kapsokefalou

30 October 2020 in Nutrients
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
Angeliki PapadakiAngeliki Papadaki
Angeliki Papadaki
ENEric Nolen-Doerr
Eric Nolen-Doerr
CMChristos S. Mantzoros
Christos S. Mantzoros
The Mediterranean diet (MD) may provide metabolic benefits but no systematic review to date has examined its effect on a multitude of outcomes related to metabolic health. This systematic review with meta-analysis (International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews, PROSPERO; number CRD42019141459) aimed to examine the MD’s effect on metabolic syndrome (MetSyn) incidence, components and risk factors (primary outcomes), and incidence and/or mortality from MetSyn-related comorbidities and receipt of pharmacologic treatment for MetSyn components and comorbidities (secondary outcomes). We searched Pubmed, Embase, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), and Web of Science for controlled trials published until June 2019, comparing the MD with no treatment, usual care, or different diets in adults. Studies not published in English and not promoting the whole MD were excluded. Two authors independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane Collaboration’s and Risk of Bias in non-randomised studies (ROBINS-I) tools. Reporting followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Random-effects meta-analyses, subgroup analyses and meta-regressions were performed, and heterogeneity was quantified using the I2 statistic. We identified 2654 reports and included 84 articles reporting 57 trials (n = 36,983). In random effects meta-analyses, the MD resulted in greater beneficial changes in 18 of 28 MetSyn components and risk factors (body weight, body mass index, waist circumference, systolic and diastolic blood pressure, glucose, insulin, homeostatic model assessment of insulin resistance (HOMA-IR) index, total-, low-density lipoprotein (LDL)- and high-density lipoprotein (HDL)-cholesterol, triglycerides, alanine transaminase, hepatic fat mass, C-reactive protein, interleukin-6, tumour necrosis factor-a, and flow-mediated dilatation) and lower risk of cardiovascular disease incidence (risk ratio (RR) = 0.61, 95% confidence intervals (CI) 0.42–0.80; I2 = 0%), and stroke (RR = 0.67, 95% CI 0.35–0.98; I2 = 0%). Only six studies reported effects on pharmacotherapy use, and pooled analysis indicated no differences between diet groups. Lack of consistency in comparator groups and other study characteristics across studies resulted in high heterogeneity for some outcomes, which could not be considerably explained by meta-regressions. However, a consistent direction of beneficial effect of the MD was observed for the vast majority of outcomes examined. Findings support MD’s beneficial effect on all components and most risk factors of the MetSyn, in addition to cardiovascular disease and stroke incidence. More studies are needed to establish effects on other clinical outcomes and use of pharmacotherapy for MetSyn components and comorbidities. Despite the high levels of heterogeneity for some outcomes, this meta-analysis enabled the comparison of findings across studies and the examination of consistency of effects. The consistent direction of effect, suggesting the MD’s benefits on metabolic health, supports the need to promote this dietary pattern to adult populations.

1 September 2019 in Nutrients
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
José J. GaforioJosé J. Gaforio
José J. Gaforio
Francesco VisioliFrancesco Visioli
Francesco Visioli
CDCatalina Alarcòn de-la-Lastra
Catalina Alarcòn de-la-Lastra
OCOlga Castañer
Olga Castañer
Miguel Delgado-RodríguezMiguel Delgado-Rodríguez
Miguel Delgado-Rodríguez
Aristidis TsatsakisAristidis Tsatsakis
Aristidis Tsatsakis
The Mediterranean diet is considered as the foremost dietary regimen and its adoption is associated with the prevention of degenerative diseases and an extended longevity. The preeminent features of the Mediterranean diet have been agreed upon and the consumption of olive oil stands out as the most peculiar one. Indeed, the use of olive oil as the nearly exclusive dietary fat is what mostly characterizes the Mediterranean area. Plenty of epidemiological studies have correlated that the consumption of olive oil was associated with better overall health. Indeed, extra virgin olive oil contains (poly)phenolic compounds that are being actively investigated for their purported biological and pharma-nutritional properties. On 18 and 19 May 2018, several experts convened in Jaen (Spain) to discuss the most recent research on the benefits of olive oil and its components. We reported a summary of that meeting (reviewing several topics related to olive oil, not limited to health) and concluded that substantial evidence is accruing to support the widespread opinion that extra virgin olive oil should, indeed, be the fat of choice when it comes to human health and sustainable agronomy.

28 January 2018 in Nutrients
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
Angeliki PapadakiAngeliki Papadaki
Angeliki Papadaki
PAPlease close this account Please close this account
Please close this account Please close this account
ZTZoi Toumpakari
Zoi Toumpakari
CEClare England
Clare England
MRManmita Rai
Manmita Rai
GFGene Feder
Gene Feder
The aim of this study was to examine the validity of the English version of the PREvencion con DIetaMEDiterranea (PREDIMED) 14-item Mediterranean Diet Adherence Screener (MEDAS), a brief questionnaire assessing adherence to the Mediterranean diet (MedDiet), which was used in the PREDIMED trial for assessment and immediate feedback. This instrument (MEDAS) was administered to 96 adults with a high cardiovascular risk (66% women, mean age 68.3 ± 6.0 years), recruited from general practices in Bristol, UK. Participants then completed a 3-day estimated food record, and the MEDAS was administered again one month later. A MedDiet score (range = 0–14) was calculated from the MEDAS’ administrations and food record to assess concurrent validity and test-retest reliability. Predictive validity was assessed by examining the association of the MEDAS-derived score with cardiometabolic risk factors and dietary intakes derived from the food records. The MEDAS-derived MedDiet score was higher by 1.47 points compared to food records (5.47 vs.4.00, p < 0.001), correlated moderately with the record-derived score (r = 0.50, p < 0.001; ICC = 0.53, p < 0.001) and there was borderline fair agreement between the two methods (κ = 0.19, 95% CI 0.07–0.31, p = 0.002; 95% limits of agreement −2.2, 5.1). Exact agreement within score categories and gross misclassificationwere 45.8% and 21.9%, respectively. The distribution of dietary intakes, reported on the food records by the MEDAS-derived total MedDiet score, was in the expected direction, but no association was observed with cardiometabolic risk factors. The two administrations of the MEDAS produced similar mean total MedDiet scores (5.5 vs. 5.4, p = 0.706), which were correlated (r and ICC = 0.69, p < 0.001) and agreed fairly (κ = 0.38, 95% CI 0.24–0.52, p < 0.001; 95% limits of agreement −3.1, 3.2). The English version of the MEDAS has acceptable accuracy and reliability for assessing MedDiet adherence among individuals with a high cardiovascular risk, in the UK, and can be used to rank individuals according to MedDiet adherence in research and practice.

1 December 2011 in Circulation
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
ÖGÖzlem Gögebakan
Özlem Gögebakan
AKAngela Kohl
Angela Kohl
MOMartin A. Osterhoff
Martin A. Osterhoff
Marleen Van BaakMarleen Van Baak
Marleen Van Baak
SJSusan A. Jebb
Susan A. Jebb
APAndreas F.H. Pfeiffer
Andreas F.H. Pfeiffer
Background—: We sought to separately examine the effects of either weight loss or diets varying in protein content and glycemic index without further changes in body weight on cardiovascular risk factors within the Diet, Obesity, and Genes study (DiOGenes). Methods and Results—: DiOGenes is a pan-European controlled dietary intervention study in 932 overweight adults who first lost body weight on an 8-week low-calorie diet and were then randomized to 1 of 5 ad libitum diets for 26 weeks. The diets were either high or low protein or high or low glycemic index in 4 combinations or control. Weight loss (−11.23 kg; 95% confidence interval, −11.54 to −10.92; P <0.001) reduced high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (−1.15 mg/L; 95% confidence interval, −1.30 to −0.41; P <0.001), low- and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, triglycerides, and blood pressure. During the 26-week weight maintenance period in the intention-to-treat analysis, the further decrease of high-sensitivity C-reactive protein blood levels was −0.46 mg/L greater (95% confidence interval, −0.79 to −0.13) in the groups assigned to low-glycemic-index diets than in those on high-glycemic-index diets ( P <0.001). Groups on low-protein diets achieved a −0.25 mg/L greater reduction in high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (95% confidence interval, −0.59 to −0.17) than those on high-protein diets ( P <0.001), whereas lipid profiles and blood pressure were not differently affected. Conclusions—: This large-scale intervention study clearly separates weight loss from dietary composition–related effects. Low-glycemic-index carbohydrates and, to a lesser extent, low-protein intake may specifically reduce low-grade inflammation and associated comorbidities in overweight/obese adults. Clinical Trial Registration—: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT00390637.