Controversial conclusions from meta-analyses in nutrition are of tremendous interest to the public and can influence policies on diet and health. When the results of meta-analyses are the product of faulty methods, they can be misleading and can also be exploited by economic interests seeking to counteract unflattering scientific findings about commercial products. The term meta-analysis was coined by Glass in the mid-1970s for a set of techniques designed to characterize and combine the findings of prior studies in order to increase statistical power, provide quantitative summary estimates, and identify data gaps and biases. When applied to studies conducted with similar populations and methods, meta-analyses can be useful. However, many published meta-analyses have combined the findings of studies that differ in important ways, prompting Eysenck to complain that they have mixed apples and oranges—and sometimes “apples, lice, and killer whales”—yielding meaningless conclusions.1 Nutritional science presents special challenges for meta-analyses. In clinical trials, nutrition interventions vary from one study to the next in many methodological details, weakening the argument for combining their results. This is in contrast to studies of drugs in which it is generally easier to assess the comparability of interventions. In observational studies, populations range widely in their dietary habits, and while some diet characteristics (eg, coffee use) are fairly consistent for

中文翻译：

---

Meta 分析在营养研究中的滥用

来自营养荟萃分析的有争议的结论引起了公众的极大兴趣，并可能影响饮食和健康政策。当荟萃分析的结果是错误方法的产物时，它们可能会产生误导，也可能被寻求抵消商业产品不讨人喜欢的科学发现的经济利益所利用。元分析一词是 Glass 在 1970 年代中期创造的一组技术，旨在表征和结合先前研究的结果，以提高统计功效，提供定量的总结估计，并识别数据差距和偏差。当应用于使用类似人群和方法进行的研究时，荟萃分析可能很有用。然而，许多已发表的荟萃分析结合了在重要方面存在差异的研究结果，这促使艾森克抱怨他们将苹果和橙子混合在一起——有时是“苹果、虱子和虎鲸”——得出了毫无意义的结论。1 营养科学对荟萃分析提出了特殊的挑战。在临床试验中，营养干预在许多方法细节上因一项研究而异，削弱了将其结果结合起来的论点。这与药物研究形成对比，药物研究通常更容易评估干预措施的可比性。在观察性研究中，人群的饮食习惯差异很大，虽然一些饮食特征（例如，喝咖啡）对于 在临床试验中，营养干预在许多方法细节上因一项研究而异，削弱了将其结果结合起来的论点。这与药物研究形成对比，药物研究通常更容易评估干预措施的可比性。在观察性研究中，人群的饮食习惯差异很大，虽然一些饮食特征（例如，喝咖啡）对于 在临床试验中，营养干预在许多方法细节上因一项研究而异，削弱了将其结果结合起来的论点。这与药物研究形成对比，药物研究通常更容易评估干预措施的可比性。在观察性研究中，人群的饮食习惯差异很大，虽然一些饮食特征（例如，喝咖啡）对于