tailieunhanh - Báo cáo y học: " Green tea (Camellia sinensis) and cancer prevention: a systematic review of randomized trials and epidemiological studies"

Tuyển tập các báo cáo nghiên cứu về y học được đăng trên tạp chí y học Critical Care giúp cho các bạn có thêm kiến thức về ngành y học đề tài: Green tea (Camellia sinensis) and cancer prevention: a systematic review of randomized trials and epidemiological studies. | Chinese Medicine BioMed Central Open Access Review Green tea Camellia sinensis and cancer prevention a systematic review of randomized trials and epidemiological studies Jianping Liu 1 2 3 Jianmin Xing1 and Yutong Fei1 Address 1Centre for Evidence-Based Chinese Medicine Beijing University of Chinese Medicine Beijing 100029 PR China 2National Research Centre in Complementary and Alternative Medicine NAFKAM University of Tromso Norway and 3Division of Chinese Medicine RMIT University Melbourne Australia Email Jianping Liu - Jianmin Xing - xjm761002@ Yutong Fei - yutong_fei@ Corresponding author Published 22 October 2008 Received 23 May 2008 Accepted 22 October 2008 Chinese Medicine 2008 3 12 doi 1749-8546-3-12 This article is available from http content 3 1 12 2008 Liu et al licensee BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License http licenses by which permits unrestricted use distribution and reproduction in any medium provided the original work is properly cited. Abstract Background Green tea is one of the most popular beverages worldwide. This review summarizes the beneficial effects of green tea on cancer prevention. Methods Electronic databases including PubMed 1966-2008 the Cochrane Library Issue I 2008 and Chinese Biomedical Database 1978-2008 with supplement of relevant websites were searched. There was no language restriction. The searches ended at March 2008. We included randomized and non-randomized clinical trials epidemiological studies cohort and case-control and a meta-analysis. We excluded case series case reports in vitro and animal studies. Outcomes were measured with estimation of relative risk hazard or odd ratios with 95 confidence interval. Results Forty-three epidemiological studies four randomized trials and one meta-analysis were identified. The overall quality of these .