↓ Skip to main content

Plasma Inflammation Markers of the Tumor Necrosis Factor Pathway but Not C-Reactive Protein Are Associated with Processed Meat and Unprocessed Red Meat Consumption in Bavarian Adults

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Nutrition, October 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
26 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
42 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Plasma Inflammation Markers of the Tumor Necrosis Factor Pathway but Not C-Reactive Protein Are Associated with Processed Meat and Unprocessed Red Meat Consumption in Bavarian Adults
Published in
Journal of Nutrition, October 2016
DOI 10.3945/jn.116.237180
Pubmed ID
Authors

Carolina Schwedhelm, Tobias Pischon, Sabine Rohrmann, Hubertus Himmerich, Jakob Linseisen, Katharina Nimptsch

Abstract

High consumption of red and processed meats has been linked to higher chronic disease risk. It has been hypothesized that inflammation markers may mediate part of this association. Most previous studies on the association of red meat intake with circulating inflammation markers used C-reactive protein (CRP) but rarely other markers, and not all differentiated between processed meat and unprocessed red meat. We investigated the cross-sectional association of processed meat and unprocessed red meat consumption with plasma concentrations of CRP, interleukin 6 (IL-6), tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α, soluble TNF receptor (sTNF-R) 1, and sTNF-R2 in German adults. Inflammation markers were quantified in the plasma of 553 adults (233 men and 320 women) aged 18-80 y within the cross-sectional Bavarian Food Consumption Survey II. Dietary intake was estimated from three 24-h dietary recalls. The association between red meat consumption and inflammation markers was analyzed with the use of multivariable-adjusted linear regression. Processed meat consumption was borderline significantly associated with higher IL-6 [relative difference per 50-g increment: 5% (95% CI: -1%, 10%)] but not with CRP (2%; 95% CI: -6%, 10%), and it was inversely associated with total TNF-α (-3%; 95% CI: -6%, -1%), sTNF-R1 (-3%; 95% CI: -4%, -1%), and sTNF-R2 (-2%; 95% CI: -4%, 0%) concentrations. Unprocessed red meat consumption was not associated with CRP (-5%; 95% CI: -15%, 5%) or IL-6 (-1%; 95% CI: -9%, 7%) but was inversely associated with sTNF-R1 (-3%; 95% CI: -5%, -1%) and sTNF-R2 (-4%; 95% CI: -7%, -2%). Our results suggest an inverse association between both processed meat and unprocessed red meat with inflammation markers of the TNF pathway in Bavarian adults but no association with CRP. Further research on the role of TNF pathway markers in chronic inflammation is warranted.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 42 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 42 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 11 26%
Other 4 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 10%
Student > Postgraduate 3 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 7%
Other 8 19%
Unknown 9 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 7 17%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 14%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 10%
Psychology 3 7%
Arts and Humanities 2 5%
Other 8 19%
Unknown 12 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 06 March 2017.
All research outputs
#16,051,091
of 25,377,790 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Nutrition
#7,914
of 9,884 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#188,268
of 321,052 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Nutrition
#67
of 88 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,377,790 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,884 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.2. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 321,052 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 88 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.