Summary
This meta-analysis of 20 studies (171,802 participants) found that meat consumption was associated with modestly lower depression (g = 0.216) and anxiety (g = 0.17) compared to meat abstention. The strength of association increased with study rigour, with study quality explaining 58% of depression heterogeneity and 76% of anxiety heterogeneity. The authors note that the current evidence precludes causal or temporal inferences.
Regional applicability
The meta-analysis included international studies and does not report UK-specific analyses. Findings may be applicable to UK populations if the included studies reflect comparable dietary patterns and mental health assessment methods, though transferability depends on the geographic and socioeconomic composition of the constituent studies.
Key measures
Hedges's g effect sizes for depression and anxiety; 95% confidence intervals; heterogeneity explained by study quality
Outcomes reported
The study examined the association between meat consumption versus abstention and rates of depression and anxiety across 20 primary studies. Effect sizes were calculated using Hedges's g to compare mental health outcomes between meat consumers and meat abstainers.
Topic tags
Dig deeper with Pulse AI.
Ask about this record, its theme or its relevance to UK farming and policy. Pulse AI uses selected catalogue evidence and cites the sources it draws on.