Skip to main content
Download PDF

Efficacy and safety of omega-3 fatty acids supplementation for anxiety symptoms: a systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BMC Psychiatry volume 24, Article number: 455 (2024) Cite this article

Abstract

Background/Objectives

There is uncertainty about the optimum dose of omega-3 fatty acids for anxiety symptoms. We aimed to find the dose-dependent effect of omega-3 supplementation on anxiety symptoms.

Methods

We systematically reviewed PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science until December 2022 to find randomized trials that assessed the effects of omega-3 fatty acids supplementation on anxiety symptoms in adults. Investigators performed the literature search and screened the titles/abstracts and full-texts and between-reviewer agreement was assessed as Cohen’s kappa coefficient. We conducted a random-effects dose-response meta-analysis to estimate standardized mean differences (SMD) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and assessed the certainty of evidence using the GRADE framework.

Results

A total of 23 trials with 2189 participants were included. Each 1 gram per day supplementation with omega-3 fatty acids resulted in a moderate decrease in anxiety symptoms (SMD: -0.70, 95%CI: -1.17, -0.22; GRADE = low). The non-linear dose-response analysis indicated the greatest improvement at 2 g/d (SMD: -0.93, 95%CI: -1.85, -0.01), and that supplementation in a dose lower than 2 g/d did not affect anxiety symptoms. Omega-3 fatty acids did not increase adverse events (odds ratio: 1.20, 95%CI: 0.89, 1.61; GRADE = moderate).

Conclusions

The present dose-response meta-analysis suggested evidence of very low certainty that supplementation with omega-3 fatty acids may significantly improve anxiety symptoms, with the greatest improvements at 2 g/d. More trials with better methodological quality are needed to reach more robust evidence.

Protocol registration

PROSPERO (CRD42022309636).

Peer Review reports

Introduction

Anxiety is a psychological state that arises from excessive or disproportionate fear, and it is the most common psychiatric symptom that can cause distress or impairment [1]. Anxiety disorders are the leading mental disorders in the world [2]. An increase in anxiety symptoms, whether they’re emotional (like fear or apprehension) or physiological (such as a fast heart rate or trembling), is a shared characteristic among these disorders [3]. However, the diagnostic criteria for anxiety disorders vary greatly, including factors like how often and how severe the symptoms are, as well as whether the triggers for these symptoms are specific or broader [3]. In general, cognitive behavioral therapy is the most empirically supported psychological treatment for adults with anxiety disorders [4]. Drug therapies are also available for all anxiety disorders [4]; however, traditional medications, particularly at high doses or long-term usage, have some unfavorable adverse effects, which limit their utilization for the treatment of anxiety disorders [5]. Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) are effective in treating anxiety disorders. Furthermore, SNRIs (serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors) influence outcomes more than a placebo does. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved venlafaxine, an SNRI, and the SSRIs paroxetine and sertraline. Benzodiazepines and the beta-blocker propranolol are also used to treat social anxiety disorder. Propranolol has the advantage of being used on an as-needed basis without the risk of developing dependence and tolerance, as exists with benzodiazepines [6].

Nutritional factors have a role in preventing and treating mental disorders [7]. Suboptimal nutrition has been implicated in the pathology of mental disorders and may impede treatment and recovery. Thus, nutritional interventions could potentially treat these disorders and are likely important for prevention [8].

Omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids, including α-linolenic acid (ALA) and docosapentaenoic acid (DPA), originate primarily from specific plant sources or are modified in plants, as well as including eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) which are almost exclusively found in marine and algal sources [9]. Humans do not efficiently synthesize these fatty acids and need to consume them directly. Marine-derived omega-3 fatty acids (EPA and DHA) regulate dopaminergic and serotonergic neurotransmission and, thus, can affect anxiety symptoms [10]. The central nervous system has the highest concentration of these fatty acids in the human body after adipose tissue [11]. The brain needs sufficient and constant amounts of EPA and DHA for optimum function and a proper structure [12].

The possible mechanisms by which omega-3 related to anxiety were as follows. It is suggested that inflammatory responses are associated with anxiety [13]. Anxiety increases the production of pro-inflammatory cytokines such as interleukin-6 and tumor necrosis factor-alpha [14]. It has been indicated that the consumption of omega-3 reduces the production of pro-inflammatory cytokines [15, 16]. Another possible mechanism is the expression of brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF), which is a protein that can regulate the function of the nervous system [17]. When this protein is low, the synaptic growth of synergistic neurons in the brain is not stimulated, and its insufficient level is associated with depression and anxiety [18, 19]. A review study including six studies with 469 participants showed that the consumption of omega-3 supplements could reduce anxiety symptoms through changes in four major mechanisms including inflammatory response, BDNF, cortisol, and cardiovascular activity [20].

Existing evidence on the efficacy of supplementation with omega-3 fatty acids in reducing anxiety symptoms is insufficient. An intervention trial revealed that omega-3 could improve anxiety among healthy subjects who encountered stressful evaluations [21]. A review study that evaluated the effects of omega-3 on anxiety indicated an improvement in anxiety symptoms (2.1 g/d EPA); however, the number of studies was very low (n = 1) [22]. A meta-analysis of intervention studies showed that supplementation with more than 2 g/day did have positive effects on anxiety symptoms [23]. Another review demonstrated that the consumption of omega-3 supplements, particularly through pathways related to inflammation, can lead to a decrease in anxiety symptoms [20]. However, two trials revealed no relation between omega-3 and anxiety disorders [24, 25]. Moreover, the optimum dose of omega-3 fatty acids for reducing anxiety symptoms is still unclear. Therefore, in this systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs), we intended to investigate the dose-dependent effects of omega-3 fatty acid supplementation on anxiety symptoms in adults.

Methods

We followed the guidelines from the Cochrane Handbook of Systematic Intervention Reviews [26] and the Grading Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) handbook to carry out the present systematic study [27]. We registered our protocol for systematic reviews in PROSPERO (CRD42022309636).

Data sources and searches

We systematically searched three scientific databases, including PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science, until February 2022, followed by an updated search to December 15, 2022. Working in duplicate, two investigators (NB and SZM) performed the literature search and screened the titles/abstracts and full-text articles in Endnote X9. The between-reviewer agreement was assessed and reported as Cohen’s kappa coefficient (κ) [28]. Disagreements were resolved by discussion with a third reviewer (SS-B). We also reviewed the reference list of meta-analysis studies of RCTs that investigated the effect of omega-3 on anxiety symptoms. Our search is limited to English-language articles. We described the complete search strategy in Table 1.

Table 1 Search strategy (PubMed) to find potential eligible trials for inclusion in a dose-response meta-analysis of omega-3 fatty acids supplementation on anxiety symptoms (2020/12/15)
Full size table

Study selection

The inclusion criteria for the present review were determined according to the PICOS (population, intervention/exposure, comparator, outcome, as well as study design) approach and included the following items: (1) RCTs (study design), conducted on adults over 18 years of age, independent of drug usage or health status (population); (2) evaluation of the effect of oral omega-3 supplements including EPA, DHA, or ALA, in combination or individually and in various forms such as pills, oils, or fortified foods (intervention), compared to a control group (comparator); (3) considered a change in anxiety symptoms, assessed by formal diagnosis or an appropriate scale as continuous scale in participants with or without existing anxiety, as an outcome; (4) provided mean and standard deviation (SD) of anxiety symptoms at baseline and end of the study or reported sufficient information to estimate these values; and (5) provided dose of omega-3 supplementation in the intervention group. On the other hand, RCTs conducted on individuals under 18 years old, including pregnant or lactating women, were excluded.

Outcomes

Our primary outcome was a change in anxiety symptoms, while secondary outcomes were adverse events and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and its components, including physical components, pain, general health, emotional well-being, and social functioning [29].

Data extraction

After the screening of the full texts, two investigators (NB and SZM) independently and in duplicate extracted the following characteristics from each trial: author’s last name, publication year, country, age range, baseline body mass index (BMI), sex, total sample size, duration of intervention, type intervention characteristics (dose of omega-3 supplementation in the intervention group), comparison group, calorie restriction, anxiety scale, baseline anxiety, any antidepressant drug usage, health status, outcome measures and main results for the outcomes included.

Risk of bias assessment

We evaluated the risk of bias using version 2.0 of the Cochrane tool for risk of bias [30]. Two authors (NB and SZM) independently evaluated the risk of bias in the trials, with disagreements resolved by the third author (AJ) when necessary.

Data synthesis and analysis

We considered the standardized mean difference (SMD) and its 95% confidence interval (CI) of changes in anxiety symptoms in the intervention group compared to the control group as the effect size for reporting the results of the present systematic review. First, we extracted the mean and SD of changes from baseline till the end of the intervention in each study arm in each trial. For those trials that did not report these changes, we calculated these values using the reported means and SDs of outcomes before and after the intervention using the Cochrane Handbook guidelines [26]. In the case of trials that reported standard errors instead of SDs, we converted them to SDs [31]. If SDs or standard errors were not reported in the trials, we used the mean SDs received from other trials for the analyses [32]. Second, for the analyses of continuous outcomes, we calculated SMD and its 95%CI for each 1 g/d increase in omega-3 fatty acids intake in each RCT using the approach introduced by Crippa and Orsini [33]. This method needs the number of participants in each study arm, dose of intervention, and the mean and SD of change across the study arm in each trial. Trial-specific mean and standard error of changes in outcomes for each 1 g/d increase in omega-3 fatty acids intake were pooled by applying the DerSimonian and Laird random-effects model [34]. We used SMD as an effect estimate because intervention trials used different questionnaires or scales (including the Barratt Impulsiveness Scale or Behavioral Inhibition/Behavioral Activation scale, etc.) to assess anxiety symptoms.

We performed predefined subgroup analyses according to baseline anxiety risk (high risk, specified as individuals with clinically diagnosed anxiety, using any diagnostic criteria; medium risk, specified as individuals with anxiety risk factors, such as long-term conditions; and low risk, specified as all other populations), intervention duration (≤ 12 versus ≥ 12 weeks) and risk of bias (high risk of bias, low risk of bias, some concerns). We selected baseline anxiety risk since it is an important effect modifier according to previous research. We also selected the risk of bias according to the GRADE instructions to determine whether the effects can also be seen in high-quality trials. Since adherence to the dietary interventions reduces over intervention duration, we selected intervention duration to determine whether the effects persisted in the long term. We also performed a meta-regression analysis to test the effect of intervention duration as a potential effect modifier.

Moreover, post-hoc subgroup analyses were according to the variables found in the literature search including supplement type (EPA, DHA, EPA + DHA), sex (men, women, both), weight status (normal weight, overweight/obese, not reported), health status (depressed, individuals with substance use, stressed, healthy, self-harm experience, ischemic stroke, Alzheimer disease, premenstrual syndrome), and antidepressant drugs usage (yes, no, mixed, not reported). According to eight criteria determined by the Instrument to assess the Credibility of Effect Modification Analyses (ICEMAN), we investigated the credibility of subgroup differences when the p-value for subgroup difference was < 0.10 [32]. ICEMAN consisted of 8 criteria to assess the credibility of the observed subgroup effects, one of which is the p-value for subgroup difference. According to the ICEMAN, when p for subgroup difference is 0.01–0.05, chance is a likely explanation, and when P < 0.01, chance is an unlikely explanation. We followed their advanced approach to avoid over interpretation of subgroup effects (Supplementary Table 2).

We applied meta-regression analysis to calculate the p-value for subgroup differences. We examined the potential influence of any trial on the primary results by applying influence analysis and removing any RCT at once. We applied Egger’s [35] and Begg’s [36] tests for publication bias and examined asymmetry in the funnel plots. For assessing the heterogeneity across trials, we applied the I2 statistic and conducted a χ2 test (Pheterogeneity>0.10) [37]. Finally, we did a dose-response meta-analysis to clarify the dose-dependent effects of omega-3 fatty acids (g/d) on anxiety symptoms [38]. For the analyses of binary outcomes (adverse events), we computed the odds ratio and risk difference and their 95%CI using the number of participants and events in the intervention and control groups. STATA software version 17.0 was used for the analyses. A two-tailed p-value < 0.05 was regarded as statistically significant.

Grading of the evidence

We used the GRADE method to evaluate the certainty of evidence [39]. According to the GRADE approach, evidence obtained from RCTs is of high certainty, which can be downgraded or upgraded by predetermined criteria. To the interpretation of the magnitude of effect sizes, the estimated SMDs were interpreted as a trivial and unimportant effect (0.0-0.2), a small effect (0.2–0.6), a moderate effect (0.6–1.2), a large effect (1.2-2.0), a very large effect (2.0–4.0), and an extremely large effect (≥ 4.0) [40, 41].

Results

Systematic search

Figure 1 shows that the database and reference list searches identified 2215 records. After excluding 146 duplicates and an additional 2029 records through screening the title and abstract, 40 full texts were assessed for eligibility. Overall, 23 trials with 2,189 participants were eligible for inclusion in this dose-response meta-analysis [21, 42,43,44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51,52,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,60,61,62]. The between-reviewer agreement for including studies was near perfect (Cohen’s kappa = 0.85) at the full-text screening step. The list of excluded full-text studies is shown in Supplementary Table 3.

Fig. 1
figure 1

Literature search and study selection process

Full size image

Characteristics of original trials

The general characteristics of the trials included in the present dose-response meta-analysis are described in Supplementary Table 4. Eligible trials were published between 2007 and 2020. In terms of health status, the subjects in the seven trials were depressed [42, 46, 47, 53, 54, 58, 61], three trials included those with Parkinson’s disease [55, 56, 59], and one trial included participants with premenstrual syndrome [60], individuals with substance use [45], acute myocardial infarction [50], those with self-harm experience [51], stress [44], and stroke [57]. The other seven trials were conducted in healthy individuals. Of the 23 trials, eight were conducted in participants with normal weight [42, 43, 45, 51, 52, 55, 59, 60], seven trials were conducted in those with overweight [44, 45, 48, 53, 55, 57, 62], and three in those with obesity [46, 47, 54]. Seven trials did not report the weight status of the participants in the study [21, 49, 50, 56, 58, 61, 63]. Nineteen out of the 23 trials had an intervention period of 12 weeks or less [21, 42,43,44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51,52,53,54,55, 57, 58, 60, 61], and the other four trials had an intervention duration longer than 12 weeks [56, 59, 62, 63]. Of the trials, 21 studies implemented a combination of EPA and DHA supplements [21, 42,43,44,45,46, 48,49,50,51,52,53,54,55, 57,58,59,60,61,62,63], one study implemented DHA supplementation [56], and one trial implemented EPA supplementation [47]. Of 23 trials, seven trials had a low risk of bias (31, 33, 43, 45, 46, 49, 52), four had some concerns [49, 53, 57, 63], and twelve were rated to have a high risk of bias (32, 34–37, 39–41, 44, 48, 50, 51) (Supplementary Table 5).

Primary outcome

Twenty-three trials with 1093 participants in the intervention group and 1096 in the control group reported information about the effect of omega-3 supplementation on anxiety symptoms [21, 42,43,44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51,52,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,60,61,62,63]. Each 1 gram per day of omega-3 fatty acids resulted in a moderate decrease in anxiety symptoms (SMD: -0.70, 95% CI: -1.17, -0.22, p < 0.001; I2 = 97%; Pheterogeneity < 0.001, GRADE = very low, Table 2) (Supplementary Fig. 1).

Table 2 The effect of omega-3 fatty acids on primary and secondary outcomes
Full size table

Table 3 indicates the subgroup analyses of the effects of omega-3 fatty acids (each 1 g/d) on anxiety symptoms. There was a significant subgroup difference by study risk of bias, where trials with a high risk of bias indicated a large and significant effect, but those with a low risk of bias did not indicate significance, as well as the magnitude of the findings. There were also other significant subgroup differences by weight status, medication use, and baseline risk of anxiety; however, in those cases, chance was a likely explanation (p subgroup difference between 0.01 and 0.05), and the credibility of subgroup difference was rated low (Supplementary Table 2) [32]. We did not find a significant or credible difference by intervention duration which was confirmed by meta-regression analysis (SMD per one-week increase: -0.01, 95%CI: -0.31, 0.06; P = 0.54).

Table 3 Subgroup analysis of the effects of omega-3 fatty acids (each 1 g/d) on anxiety symptoms
Full size table

We observed no indication of publication bias with Egger’s test (P = 0.61), Begg’s test (P = 0.13), or with the inspection of the funnel plot (Supplementary Fig. 2). The dose-dependent effects of omega-3 on anxiety symptoms are shown in Table 4; Fig. 2. The non-linear dose-response analysis indicated the greatest improvement at 2 g/d, where we found a moderate improvement in anxiety symptoms (SMD2g/d: -0.93; 95%CI: -1.85, -0.01) (Pdose−response: 0.051, Pnonlinearity = 0.464; n = 23, Fig. 2).

Table 4 The effects of omega-3 fatty acids on anxiety symptoms from the nonlinear dose-response meta-analysis (standardized mean difference and 95% confidence interval)
Full size table
Fig. 2
figure 2

Dose-dependent effect of omega-3 fatty acids on anxiety symptoms. Solid lines represent standardized mean difference and dashed lines represent 95% confidence interval

Full size image

Secondary outcomes

The effect of omega-3 fatty acids on secondary outcomes is reported in Table 2. Omega-3 fatty acids did not increase adverse events. Supplementation with omega-3 fatty acids resulted in a small increase in social functioning (SMD: 0.52, 95% CI: 0.05, 0.98; GRADE = very low), but it did not increase other aspects of quality of life such as emotional well-being, general health, and physical component scale.

Grading of the evidence

The certainty of evidence was rated very low for the effects of omega-3 fatty acids on anxiety symptoms. It was rated moderate for the effects of supplementation with omega-3 fatty acids on adverse events. The certainty of evidence was rated very low for other outcomes (Supplementary Table 6).

Discussion

The present meta-analysis of intervention trials was the first study that addresses previous review limitations. It examines the dose-dependent effect of omega-3 fatty acids on anxiety symptoms, applying methodologies not previously utilized in similar studies. These methodologies include dose-dependent analysis to determine the optimal dosage for improving anxiety symptoms, utilization of ICEMAN for evaluating the credibility of subgroup differences, and application of the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of evidence in the included studies. We also conducted subgroup analysis according to baseline risk of anxiety, health status, and any antidepressant drug usage to identify which group benefits the most from omega-3 supplementation. Our findings showed that each 1 g/d omega-3 could moderately reduce anxiety symptoms. The dose-response meta-analysis suggested the greatest improvement at 2 g/d, and that higher doses of omega-3 supplements did not confer added health benefits.

A previous meta-analysis of 19 clinical trial articles (n = 2240 participants) demonstrated that omega-3 consumption in a dose below 2 g per day did not show any significant effects on anxiety symptoms. The participants included in the studies summarized in this meta-analysis were both healthy individuals and individuals with either a physical illness or mental disorder [23]. Another review study among individuals with no serious illness, including 31 trials, indicated that increasing omega-3 intake (300–3360 mg/d) might have little or no effect on reducing anxiety symptoms [64]. A reason for the contradictory results may be that in most original studies, the dose of omega-3 consumed was less than 2 g. Our dose-response meta-analysis indicated that supplementation with omega-3 fatty acids at a dose lower than 2 g/d did not significantly reduce anxiety symptoms.

Moreover, the subgroup analysis failed to show a significant and credible subgroup difference by intervention duration, and only four trials had an intervention duration longer than 12 weeks. In addition, we found a significant subgroup difference by study risk of bias, where trials with a low risk of bias did not show a significant effect. Therefore, more trials with better methodological quality and longer intervention duration are needed in this field.

We did not find a significant subgroup difference by supplement type (EPA versus DHA versus combined). This might be because the number of included studies for EPA and DHA supplements was very low (for EPA (n = 1) and DHA (n = 1); as a result, we were unable to find the difference between EPA and DHA. An intervention trial study indicated a significant decrease in anxiety and angry symptoms by daily intake of EPA & DHA (2,250 mg/d of EPA + 500 mg/d of DHA) for 12 weeks. They also indicated that both EPA and DHA serum levels were incremented; however, the EPA was more effective in improving anxiety symptoms and DHA was more effective in improving anger symptoms. This might be because of the different modes of action of long-chain omega-3 fatty acids for anger and anxiety [45]. Administration of EPA could reduce anxiety behavior in rats, as well as the stimulation of corticosterone by interleukin-1 beta [65]. Besides, changes in the way serotonin (5-HT) neurotransmission works in the brain can contribute to violent behavior, and consuming more DHA could help increase 5-HT neurotransmission in the brain. A study has shown that people with higher levels of plasma DHA were more likely to have higher levels of cerebrospinal fluid 5-Hydroxyindole Acetic Acid for both healthy individuals and late-onset alcoholics [66].

A cross-sectional study of 935 Australian adults indicated that those in the upper quartile of DHA intake had half of anxiety disorders compared to those in the lower quartile of DHA intake. No significant relationship was found for other types of omega-3 fatty acids, such as EPA [67]. However, of the 23 trials included in the present review, 21 used a combination of EPA and DHA, and thus, more trials are needed to determine whether EPA or DHA are superior to each other in reducing anxiety symptoms.

Regarding any antidepressant drug usage, we found a significant subgroup difference, where supplementation with omega-3 could significantly reduce the risk of anxiety symptoms in individuals who used any antidepressant drugs compared to individuals who did not use any antidepressant drugs or in combination. These findings indicate that omega-3 fatty acids might be more effective in individuals who use antidepressant drugs. A research study has shown that incorporating omega-3 as an add-on therapy has significantly enhanced the clinical effectiveness of antidepressant drugs such as sertraline. For example, combining antidepressant drugs with dietary and physiological supplements has amplified their antidepressant effects [68, 69].

Our dose-response meta-analysis suggested that supplementation with omega-3 fatty acids at a dose of lower than 2 g/d had no effects on anxiety symptoms in adults. The greatest impact was also seen at this dose. This was consistent with a previous pairwise meta-analysis of intervention studies that suggested that the effects of omega-3 fatty acids on anxiety symptoms were stronger in the subgroup of trials with higher doses (at least 2 g/d) [23]. Our results provided additional practical information, suggesting that supplementation at a dose higher than 2 g/d did not confer additional decrement in anxiety symptoms.

Strengths and limitations

Our review had several strengths. First, this review was the first study to examine the dose-dependent effect of omega-3 fatty acids on anxiety symptoms. Second, we rated the certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach and utilized the MCID thresholds to determine whether the results were clinically important. Lastly, we conducted a subgroup analysis to find the source of heterogeneity and used the recently released ICEMAN tool for subgroup analyses. Among the limitations of our study, the variety of assessment methods for anxiety symptoms may also limit clinical interpretation and generalizability of the results. Moreover, we did not evaluate the potential effect modification by baseline omega-3 status in the study participants, which may affect our results. Examining this issue can help determine if supplementation is only required for deficient individuals or if it’s effective in all individuals, including those with normal intake. Also, we included adults regardless of their anxiety and health status. The results of our subgroup analysis also showed no significant effects in the subgroup of individuals with depression and high risk (baseline anxiety risk). Therefore, researchers should be careful about the interpretation of the results and discuss more carefully about these findings. Considering these limitations, more trials should be done on the possible effects of omega-3 on anxiety in individuals with anxiety and depression. Finally, we included only four studies with long-term duration, and thus, we could not thoroughly investigate the long-term effect of omega-3 fatty acids on anxiety symptoms.

Conclusions

In this systematic review and meta-analysis, it was seen that the consumption of each 1 gram of omega-3 per day reduced anxiety symptoms, but certainty of evidence was rated low. Dose-dependent analysis revealed that the maximum reduction in anxiety symptoms was seen in a dose of 2 g/d. However, further controlled trials with long-term follow-up and considering the baseline omega-3 status of the participants, as well as possible effects of omega-3 on individuals with anxiety and depression are needed to indicate more accurate results.

Data availability

The data sets generated or analyzed during the current study are not publicly available but are available from the corresponding author at reasonable request.

References

  1. Kessler RC, Petukhova M, Sampson NA, Zaslavsky AM, Wittchen HU. Twelve-month and lifetime prevalence and lifetime morbid risk of anxiety and mood disorders in the United States. Int J Methods Psychiatr Res. 2012;21(3):169–84.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Stein DJ, Scott KM, de Jonge P, Kessler RC. Epidemiology of anxiety disorders: from surveys to nosology and back. Dialogues Clin Neurosci. 2017;19(2):127–36.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Haller H, Cramer H, Lauche R, Gass F, Dobos GJ. The prevalence and burden of subthreshold generalized anxiety disorder: a systematic review. BMC Psychiatry. 2014;14:1–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Craske MG, Stein MB. Anxiety. Lancet. 2016;388(10063):3048–59.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Lader M. Benzodiazepine harm: how can it be reduced? Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2014;77(2):295–301.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Mayo-Wilson E, Dias S, Mavranezouli I, Kew K, Clark DM, Ades A, Pilling S. Psychological and pharmacological interventions for social anxiety disorder in adults: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. Lancet Psychiatry. 2014;1(5):368–76.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Border K, Endrizal C, Cecil M. Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics: revised 2018 standards of Professional Performance for Registered Dietitian nutritionists (competent, proficient, and Expert) in Education of Nutrition and Dietetics Practitioners. J Acad Nutr Diet. 2019;119(1):124–e136129.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Kris-Etherton PM, Petersen KS, Hibbeln JR, Hurley D, Kolick V, Peoples S, Rodriguez N, Woodward-Lopez G. Nutrition and behavioral health disorders: depression and anxiety. Nutr Rev. 2021;79(3):247–60.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Shahidi F, Ambigaipalan P. Omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids and their health benefits. Annu Rev Food Sci Technol. 2018;9:345–81.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Grosso G, Pajak A, Marventano S, Castellano S, Galvano F, Bucolo C, Drago F, Caraci F. Role of omega-3 fatty acids in the treatment of depressive disorders: a comprehensive meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials. PLoS ONE. 2014;9(5):e96905.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Larrieu T, Layé S. Food for Mood: relevance of nutritional Omega-3 fatty acids for depression and anxiety. Front Physiol. 2018;9:1047.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. von Schacky C. Importance of EPA and DHA blood levels in Brain structure and function. Nutrients 2021, 13(4).

  13. Khandaker GM, Zammit S, Lewis G, Jones PB. Association between serum C-reactive protein and DSM-IV generalized anxiety disorder in adolescence: findings from the ALSPAC cohort. Neurobiol Stress. 2016;4:55–61.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Zhang JM, An J. Cytokines, inflammation, and pain. Int Anesthesiol Clin. 2007;45(2):27–37.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Caughey GE, Mantzioris E, Gibson RA, Cleland LG, James MJ. The effect on human tumor necrosis factor alpha and interleukin 1 beta production of diets enriched in n-3 fatty acids from vegetable oil or fish oil. Am J Clin Nutr. 1996;63(1):116–22.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Kiecolt-Glaser JK, Belury MA, Andridge R, Malarkey WB, Hwang BS, Glaser R. Omega-3 supplementation lowers inflammation in healthy middle-aged and older adults: a randomized controlled trial. Brain Behav Immun. 2012;26(6):988–95.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Kaplan DR, Miller FD. Neurotrophin signal transduction in the nervous system. Curr Opin Neurobiol. 2000;10(3):381–91.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Mattson MP, Maudsley S, Martin B. BDNF and 5-HT: a dynamic duo in age-related neuronal plasticity and neurodegenerative disorders. Trends Neurosci. 2004;27(10):589–94.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Jacobsen JP, Medvedev IO, Caron MG. The 5-HT deficiency theory of depression: perspectives from a naturalistic 5-HT deficiency model, the tryptophan hydroxylase 2Arg439His knockin mouse. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2012;367(1601):2444–59.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Polokowski AR, Shakil H, Carmichael CL, Reigada LC. Omega-3 fatty acids and anxiety: a systematic review of the possible mechanisms at play. Nutr Neurosci. 2020;23(7):494–504.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Kiecolt-Glaser JK, Belury MA, Andridge R, Malarkey WB, Glaser R. Omega-3 supplementation lowers inflammation and anxiety in medical students: a randomized controlled trial. Brain Behav Immun. 2011;25(8):1725–34.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Kelaiditis CF, Gibson EL, Dyall SC. Effects of long-chain omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids on reducing anxiety and/or depression in adults; a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. Prostaglandins Leukot Essent Fat Acids. 2023;192:102572.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Su KP, Tseng PT, Lin PY, Okubo R, Chen TY, Chen YW, Matsuoka YJ. Association of Use of Omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids with changes in severity of anxiety symptoms: a systematic review and Meta-analysis. JAMA Netw Open. 2018;1(5):e182327.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Fux M, Benjamin J, Nemets B. A placebo-controlled cross-over trial of adjunctive EPA in OCD. J Psychiatr Res. 2004;38(3):323–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Lespérance F, Frasure-Smith N, St-André E, Turecki G, Lespérance P, Wisniewski SR. The efficacy of omega-3 supplementation for major depression: a randomized controlled trial. J Clin Psychiatry. 2010;71(8):6074.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Cumpston M, Li T, Page MJ, Chandler J, Welch VA, Higgins JP, Thomas J. Updated guidance for trusted systematic reviews: a new edition of the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019;10:Ed000142.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Schunemann H. GRADE handbook for grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendation. Version 3.2. http://www cc-ims net/gradepro 2008.

  28. Cohen J. A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educ Psychol Meas. 1960;20(1):37–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Brenes GA. Anxiety, depression, and quality of life in primary care patients. Prim care Companion J Clin Psychiatry. 2007;9(6):437.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  30. Sterne JAC, Savović J, Page MJ, Elbers RG, Blencowe NS, Boutron I, Cates CJ, Cheng H-Y, Corbett MS, Eldridge SM, et al. RoB 2: a revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ. 2019;366:l4898.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Higgins JP, Altman DG, Gøtzsche PC, Jüni P, Moher D, Oxman AD, Savović J, Schulz KF, Weeks L, Sterne JA. The Cochrane collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ 2011, 343.

  32. Schandelmaier S, Briel M, Varadhan R, Schmid CH, Devasenapathy N, Hayward RA, Gagnier J, Borenstein M, van der Heijden G, Dahabreh IJ, et al. Development of the instrument to assess the credibility of Effect modification analyses (ICEMAN) in randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses. CMAJ. 2020;192(32):E901–6.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  33. Crippa A, Orsini N. Dose-response meta-analysis of differences in means. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2016;16(1):1–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. DerSimonian R, Laird N. Meta-analysis in clinical trials. Control Clin Trials. 1986;7(3):177–88.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Egger M, Davey Smith G, Schneider M, Minder C. Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. BMJ. 1997;315(7109):629–34.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  36. Begg CB, Mazumdar M. Operating characteristics of a rank correlation test for publication bias. Biometrics. 1994;50(4):1088–101.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Higgins JPSJ, Page MJ, Elbers RG, Sterne JA. Assessing risk of bias in a randomized trial. In: Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions edn.; 2019: 205–228.

  38. Crippa A, Orsini N. Dose-response meta-analysis of differences in means. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2016;16:91.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  39. Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Kunz R, Brozek J, Alonso-Coello P, Rind D, Devereaux PJ, Montori VM, Freyschuss B, Vist G, et al. GRADE guidelines 6. Rating the quality of evidence–imprecision. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011;64(12):1283–93.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Hopkins WG, Marshall SW, Batterham AM, Hanin J. Progressive statistics for studies in sports medicine and exercise science. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2009;41(1):3–13.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Varangot-Reille C, Suso-Martí L, Romero-Palau M, Suárez-Pastor P, Cuenca-Martínez F. Effects of different therapeutic Exercise modalities on Migraine or Tension-Type Headache: a systematic review and Meta-analysis with a replicability analysis. J Pain. 2022;23(7):1099–122.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Antypa N, Smelt AH, Strengholt A, Van der Does AJ. Effects of omega-3 fatty acid supplementation on mood and emotional information processing in recovered depressed individuals. J Psychopharmacol. 2012;26(5):738–43.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Antypa N, Van der Does AJ, Smelt AH, Rogers RD. Omega-3 fatty acids (fish-oil) and depression-related cognition in healthy volunteers. J Psychopharmacol. 2009;23(7):831–40.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Bradbury J, Myers SP, Meyer B, Brooks L, Peake J, Sinclair AJ, Stough C. Chronic psychological stress was not ameliorated by Omega-3 eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA). Front Pharmacol. 2017;8:551.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  45. Buydens-Branchey L, Branchey M, Hibbeln JR. Associations between increases in plasma n-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids following supplementation and decreases in anger and anxiety in substance abusers. Prog Neuropsychopharmacol Biol Psychiatry. 2008;32(2):568–75.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Carney RM, Freedland KE, Rubin EH, Rich MW, Steinmeyer BC, Harris WS. Omega-3 augmentation of sertraline in treatment of depression in patients with coronary heart disease: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 2009;302(15):1651–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  47. Carney RM, Freedland KE, Rubin EH, Rich MW, Steinmeyer BC, Harris WS. A randomized placebo-controlled trial of Omega-3 and sertraline in depressed patients with or at risk for Coronary Heart Disease. J Clin Psychiatry 2019, 80(4).

  48. Cohen LS, Joffe H, Guthrie KA, Ensrud KE, Freeman M, Carpenter JS, Learman LA, Newton KM, Reed SD, Manson JE, et al. Efficacy of omega-3 for vasomotor symptoms treatment: a randomized controlled trial. Menopause. 2014;21(4):347–54.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  49. Dretsch MN, Johnston D, Bradley RS, MacRae H, Deuster PA, Harris WS. Effects of omega-3 fatty acid supplementation on neurocognitive functioning and mood in deployed U.S. soldiers: a pilot study. Mil Med. 2014;179(4):396–403.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Haberka M, Mizia-Stec K, Mizia M, Gieszczyk K, Chmiel A, Sitnik-Warchulska K, Gąsior Z. Effects of n-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids on depressive symptoms, anxiety and emotional state in patients with acute myocardial infarction. Pharmacol Rep. 2013;65(1):59–68.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Hallahan B, Hibbeln JR, Davis JM, Garland MR. Omega-3 fatty acid supplementation in patients with recurrent self-harm. Single-centre double-blind randomised controlled trial. Br J Psychiatry. 2007;190:118–22.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Jackson PA, Deary ME, Reay JL, Scholey AB, Kennedy DO. No effect of 12 weeks’ supplementation with 1 g DHA-rich or EPA-rich fish oil on cognitive function or mood in healthy young adults aged 18–35 years. Br J Nutr. 2012;107(8):1232–43.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Jahangard L, Sadeghi A, Ahmadpanah M, Holsboer-Trachsler E, Sadeghi Bahmani D, Haghighi M, Brand S. Influence of adjuvant omega-3-polyunsaturated fatty acids on depression, sleep, and emotion regulation among outpatients with major depressive disorders - results from a double-blind, randomized and placebo-controlled clinical trial. J Psychiatr Res. 2018;107:48–56.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Jiang W, Whellan DJ, Adams KF, Babyak MA, Boyle SH, Wilson JL, Patel CB, Rogers JG, Harris WS. O’Connor CM: long-chain Omega-3 fatty acid supplements in Depressed Heart failure patients: results of the OCEAN Trial. JACC Heart Fail. 2018;6(10):833–43.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Lucas M, Asselin G, Mérette C, Poulin MJ, Dodin S. Ethyl-eicosapentaenoic acid for the treatment of psychological distress and depressive symptoms in middle-aged women: a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trial. Am J Clin Nutr. 2009;89(2):641–51.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Pomponi M, Loria G, Salvati S, Di Biase A, Conte G, Villella C, Righino E, Ciciarelli C, Bria P, La Torre G, et al. DHA effects in Parkinson disease depression. Basal Ganglia. 2014;4(2):61–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Poppitt SD, Howe CA, Lithander FE, Silvers KM, Lin RB, Croft J, Ratnasabapathy Y, Gibson RA, Anderson CS. Effects of moderate-dose omega-3 fish oil on cardiovascular risk factors and mood after ischemic stroke: a randomized, controlled trial. Stroke. 2009;40(11):3485–92.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Ravi S, Khalili H, Abbasian L, Arbabi M, Ghaeli P. Effect of Omega-3 fatty acids on depressive symptoms in HIV-Positive individuals: a Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Clinical Trial. Ann Pharmacother. 2016;50(10):797–807.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Robinson DG, Gallego JA, John M, Hanna LA, Zhang JP, Birnbaum ML, Greenberg J, Naraine M, Peters BD, McNamara RK, et al. A potential role for adjunctive omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids for depression and anxiety symptoms in recent onset psychosis: results from a 16 week randomized placebo-controlled trial for participants concurrently treated with risperidone. Schizophr Res. 2019;204:295–303.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Sohrabi N, Kashanian M, Ghafoori SS, Malakouti SK. Evaluation of the effect of omega-3 fatty acids in the treatment of premenstrual syndrome: a pilot trial. Complement Ther Med. 2013;21(3):141–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Tayama J, Ogawa S, Nakaya N, Sone T, Hamaguchi T, Takeoka A, Hamazaki K, Okamura H, Yajima J, Kobayashi M, et al. Omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids and psychological intervention for workers with mild to moderate depression: a double-blind randomized controlled trial. J Affect Disord. 2019;245:364–70.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. van de Rest O, Geleijnse JM, Kok FJ, van Staveren WA, Hoefnagels WH, Beekman AT, de Groot LC. Effect of fish-oil supplementation on mental well-being in older subjects: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Am J Clin Nutr. 2008;88(3):706–13.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Watanabe N, Matsuoka Y, Kumachi M, Hamazaki K, Horikoshi M, Furukawa TA. Omega-3 fatty acids for a better mental state in working populations - happy nurse project: a 52-week randomized controlled trial. J Psychiatr Res. 2018;102:72–80.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Deane KHO, Jimoh OF, Biswas P, O’Brien A, Hanson S, Abdelhamid AS, Fox C, Hooper L. Omega-3 and polyunsaturated fat for prevention of depression and anxiety symptoms: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised trials. Br J Psychiatry. 2021;218(3):135–42.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Song C, Leonard BE, Horrobin DF. Dietary ethyl-eicosapentaenoic acid but not soybean oil reverses central interleukin-1-induced changes in behavior, corticosterone and immune response in rats. Stress. 2004;7(1):43–54.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Hibbeln JR. Fish consumption and major depression. Lancet. 1998;351(9110):1213.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Jacka FN, Pasco JA, Williams LJ, Meyer BJ, Digger R, Berk M. Dietary intake of fish and PUFA, and clinical depressive and anxiety disorders in women. Br J Nutr. 2013;109(11):2059–66.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Hoepner CT, McIntyre RS, Papakostas GI. Impact of supplementation and nutritional interventions on pathogenic processes of mood disorders: a review of the evidence. Nutrients. 2021;13(3):767.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  69. Sikka P, Behl T, Sharma S, Sehgal A, Bhatia S, Al-Harrasi A, Singh S, Sharma N, Aleya L. Exploring the therapeutic potential of omega-3 fatty acids in depression. Environ Sci Pollut Res. 2021;28:43021–34.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

The authors received no funding for this study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Community Nutrition, School of Nutritional Science and Dietetics, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

    Negar Bafkar & Sakineh Shab-Bidar

  2. Department of Health and Human Performance, University of Houston, Houston, TX, USA

    Sheida Zeraattalab-Motlagh

  3. Social Determinants of Health Research Center, Semnan University of Medical Sciences, Semnan, Iran

    Ahmad Jayedi

  4. Sports Medicine Research Center, Neuroscience Institute, Tehran University of Medical Sciences (TUMS), Tehran, Iran

    Sakineh Shab-Bidar

Authors
  1. Negar Bafkar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sheida Zeraattalab-Motlagh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ahmad Jayedi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Sakineh Shab-Bidar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

SS-B and AJ designed the research; NB and SZM conducted research; AJ analyzed data; SZM and AJ edited tables and images and the manuscript; NB and SZM wrote the manuscript; SS-B and AJ provided essential revisions for the final content. All authors reviewed and approved the study content.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sakineh Shab-Bidar.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Conflict of interest

All authors declare no conflict of interest.

Transparency declaration

The lead author affirms that the manuscript is an honest, accurate, and transparent account of the studies being reported; that no important aspects of the study have been omitted; and that any discrepancies from the study as planned (and, if relevant, registered) have been explained.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary Materials

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Bafkar, N., Zeraattalab-Motlagh, S., Jayedi, A. et al. Efficacy and safety of omega-3 fatty acids supplementation for anxiety symptoms: a systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. BMC Psychiatry 24, 455 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12888-024-05881-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12888-024-05881-2

Keywords

BMC Psychiatry

ISSN: 1471-244X

Contact us