# Association of red and processed meat consumption with cancer incidence and mortality: An umbrella review protocol

## TL;DR

This paper outlines a protocol for an umbrella review to assess the credibility of evidence linking red and processed meat consumption to cancer incidence and mortality.

## Contribution

The study introduces a standardized protocol to evaluate the strength of evidence and dose-response relationships in meat-cancer associations.

## Key findings

- The protocol will assess the credibility of evidence for associations between meat consumption and cancer outcomes.
- It will update meta-analyses by including new studies not previously analyzed.
- Results will categorize evidence as convincing, highly suggestive, suggestive, or weak based on P values.

## Abstract

Many meta-analyses have reported the associations between red and processed meat consumption and cancer outcomes, but few have assessed the credibility of the evidence. In addition, the results of dose-effect analyses of the association between red and processed meat consumption and cancer outcomes were inconsistently reported in different articles. Here we propose a protocol for an umbrella review (UR) that be designed to assess these associations and explore the potential dose-response relationships.

We will independently search five electronic databases and two registers from inception to July 2024 for systematic reviews with meta-analysis concerning the associations of red and processed meat consumption with cancer incidence and mortality. We will conduct the statistical analysis between August 2024 and December 2024. Also, an up-to-date search for additional primary studies of cancer outcomes that were not included in previously published meta-analyses will be conducted. The main outcomes will include the incidence and mortality of any cancer related to red and processed meat exposure. A series of unique associations will be created based on the cancer outcome, exposure, and clinical or population setting. For each association, we will update the meta-analysis by combining studies included in prior meta-analyses and new studies that were not included in prior meta-analyses, and re-perform the meta-analysis using the random-effects models. According to the credibility of the evidence assessment, all associations with a P value of ≤  0.05 will be categorized as convincing, highly suggestive, suggestive, or weak evidence. All analyses will be performed in R (version 4.2.3).

The results of this UR are planned to be submitted to a peer-reviewed journal.

The main aim of protocol publication is to get feed back from the reviewers to develop a standard protocol before its publication and after publication, it should guide this protocol to take up similar research by any researcher(s) by following meticulously this standard protocol.

PROSPERO CRD42023414550.