Back

Causal relationship between tea intake and chronic pain: A Mendelian randomization study

Liu, S.; Xu, D.

2025-05-11 nutrition
10.1101/2025.05.10.25327365
Show abstract

ObjectiveAccording to some studies, chronic pain imposes a significant burden on individuals and the economy, affecting more than 30% of the global population. However, the relationship between tea intake and chronic pain remains unclear. MethodsThis study employed Mendelian randomization (MR) to detect the causal relationship between tea intake and chronic pain. The tea intake was obtained from the UK Biobank. The Multisite chronic pain (MCP) was used as the primary outcome, while chronic widespread pain (CWP) served as the secondary outcome. To assess heterogeneity, we applied Cochrans Q statistic with IVW methods. Additionally, the MR-Egger intercept test and MR-PRESSO test were performed to detect potential pleiotropy. ResultsThe results showed that tea intake increased the risk of MCP. Specifically, an increase in tea intake was associated with a higher risk of MCP (OR = 1.088, 95%CI = 1.038-1.141, P < 0.001). However, no causal relationship was found between tea intake and CWP (OR = 1.006, 95%CI = 0.999-1.014, P > 0.05). Furthermore, no reverse causality was observed. ConclusionOur findings suggested that genetically predicted tea intake was a risk factor for chronic pain. These results may help shed light on the potential health impacts of tea take, providing further insights into its influence on chronic pain.

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Frontiers in Nutrition
based on 13 papers
Top 0.1%
19.1%
2
PLOS ONE
based on 1737 papers
Top 33%
14.2%
3
Scientific Reports
based on 701 papers
Top 9%
12.6%
4
BMJ Nutrition, Prevention & Health
based on 10 papers
Top 0.2%
5.7%
50% of probability mass above
5
Public Health Nutrition
based on 14 papers
Top 0.6%
5.1%
6
The Journal of Nutrition
based on 11 papers
Top 0.7%
3.3%
7
International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity
based on 15 papers
Top 0.6%
3.2%
8
Nutrients
based on 43 papers
Top 2%
2.7%
9
The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition
based on 16 papers
Top 0.7%
2.6%
10
eLife
based on 262 papers
Top 10%
2.6%
11
BMJ Open
based on 553 papers
Top 38%
2.0%
12
Gut
based on 17 papers
Top 1%
2.0%
13
Current Developments in Nutrition
based on 11 papers
Top 0.8%
1.8%
14
International Journal of Public Health
based on 17 papers
Top 1%
0.9%
15
International Journal of Obesity
based on 17 papers
Top 2%
0.9%
16
Frontiers in Medicine
based on 99 papers
Top 16%
0.9%
17
Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews
based on 19 papers
Top 3%
0.9%
18
Cureus
based on 64 papers
Top 15%
0.9%
19
Human Molecular Genetics
based on 28 papers
Top 4%
0.9%
20
PLOS Digital Health
based on 88 papers
Top 12%
0.8%
21
PLOS Medicine
based on 95 papers
Top 16%
0.8%
22
Social Science & Medicine
based on 15 papers
Top 2%
0.8%
23
Clinical and Translational Science
based on 14 papers
Top 2%
0.8%
24
Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics
based on 19 papers
Top 2%
0.8%
25
Frontiers in Digital Health
based on 18 papers
Top 4%
0.8%