L-ascorbic acid/Finding
One finding, on its own
A single claim from the graph, with the evidence strength computed from its study, the sentence it was drawn from, and the paper. This address does not change.
No detected effect on nuclear cataract incidence
ModerateEvidence strength: moderate. Human evidence with one recorded weakness, or capped at moderate by its design or by unread numbers.FindingNull result“For subtypes, there were no significant effects of vitamin C on incidence of nuclear (HR, 1.01; CI, 0.89-1.14), cortical (HR, 1.10; CI, 0.92-1.31), or PSC cataract (HR, 0.94; CI, 0.76-1.17) (Table 2).”
Quoted verbatim from Age-related cataract in a randomized trial of vitamins E and C in men.. - Study
- RCT
- Dose
- 500 mg synthetic ascorbic acid daily versus placebo
- Population
- 11,545 apparently healthy US male physicians aged 50 years or older without cataract at baseline, in a 2x2x2x2 factorial trial where vitamin E, multivitamin and beta-carotene were randomised independently of vitamin C
Effect 1.01 hazard ratio, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.14
Age-related cataract in a randomized trial of vitamins E and C in men.2010PMID:21060040Industry fundedPermalink
Keep reading
- Everything the graph holds on L-ascorbic acid
- Every compound studied against Nuclear cataract incidence
- How to read the evidence strength and the marks
To cite this finding: https://catalystproject.ai/e/01M4QGQ222DM5V1S6BEXXDGD7C