High vs low ALA omega‐3 fats: Cardiovascular events
High showed no clear difference in cardiovascular events compared with low alpha‐linolenic acid omega‐3 fats (low certainty).
What each review found
Current versions only| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
High vs low alpha‐linolenic acid omega‐3 fats Cardiovascular events · adults with or without existing CVD High showed no clear difference in cardiovascular events compared with low alpha‐linolenic acid omega‐3 fats (low certainty). Omega‐3 fatty acids for the primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease (2020) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | RR 0.95 [0.83, 1.07] | 5 studies · 19327 participants | Low |
High vs low ALA omega‐3 fats Cardiovascular events – cardiovascular events · adults with or without existing CVD High showed no clear difference in cardiovascular events – cardiovascular events compared with low ALA omega‐3 fats (low certainty). Omega‐3 fatty acids for the primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease (2018) · Cochrane Headline outcomes onlyearlier version CD003177.PUB3, superseded | RR 0.95 [0.83, 1.07] | 5 studies · 19327 participants | Low |
High vs low ALA omega‐3 fats Cardiovascular events – cardiovascular events · adults with or without existing CVD High showed no clear difference in cardiovascular events – cardiovascular events compared with low ALA omega‐3 fats (low certainty). Omega‐3 fatty acids for the primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease (2018) · Cochrane Headline outcomes onlyearlier version CD003177.PUB4, superseded | RR 0.95 [0.83, 1.07] | 5 studies · 19327 participants | Low |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Omega‐3 fatty acids for the primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease 2020 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | Not reported | list not extracted yet | Not assessed |
Studies behind the findings
None of these reviews ties its included studies to this outcome in the data here. Cochrane reviews and reviews with headline outcomes only do not list their studies yet.
How reviews are matched to this question
Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.