Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

Reply to ‘Healthy dietary indices and risk of depressive outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies’

Access options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

from$8.99

All prices are NET prices.

References

  1. 1.

    Lassale C, Batty GD, Baghdadli A, Jacka F, Sánchez-Villegas A, Kivimäki M, et al. Healthy dietary indices and risk of depressive outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies. Mol Psychiatry. 2018;24:1094.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    Viera AJ. Odds ratios and risk ratios: what’s the difference and why does it matter? South Med J. 2008;101:730–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Sedgwick P. Relative risks versus odds ratios. Br Med J. 2014;348:g1407.

  4. 4.

    Schmidt CO, Kohlmann T. When to use the odds ratio or the relative risk? Int J Public Health. 2008;53:165–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Moayyedi P. Meta-analysis: Can we mix apples and oranges? Am J Gastroenterol. 2004;99:2297.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Cummings P. Methods for estimating adjusted risk ratios. Stata J. 2009;9:175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Matias AGC, Fonsêca MdA, Gomes MdLdF, Matos MAA. Indicators of depression in elderly and different screening methods. Einst (São Paulo). 2016;14:6–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, Mulrow C, Gøtzsche PC, Ioannidis JPA, et al. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. PLoS Med. 2009;6:e1000100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Chinn S. A simple method for converting an odds ratio to effect size for use in meta-analysis. Stat Med. 2000;19:3127–31.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Schünemann H, Oxman A, Vist G, Higgins J, Deeks J, Glasziou P on behalf of the Cochrane Applicability and Recommendations Methods Group et al. Chapter 12: Interpreting results and drawing conclusions. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5; 2011.

  11. 11.

    Ioannidis JPA. Why most published research findings are false. PLoS Med. 2005;2:e124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nicola Veronese.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s note: Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Veronese, N., Smith, L. Reply to ‘Healthy dietary indices and risk of depressive outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies’. Mol Psychiatry 25, 3119–3120 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41380-019-0462-9

Download citation

Further reading

Search

Quick links