Evidence mapPaperPMID 33005208Full record

ArticleNutrition & metabolism2020

Optimisation of a metabotype approach to deliver targeted dietary advice.

Elaine Hillesheim, Miriam F Ryan, Eileen Gibney, Helen M Roche, Lorraine Brennan

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nutrition & metabolism, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06163794 (New Participatory Research Strategy and Multidimensional Phenotyping Towards Personalized Preventive Nutritional Support for Elderly People), which is not on this map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
3.4field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT06163794 narecruitingnot on this mapstarted 2024, after this paper: background citation

New Participatory Research Strategy and Multidimensional Phenotyping Towards Personalized Preventive Nutritional Support for Elderly People

TypeinterventionalSponsorInstitut National de Recherche pour l'Agriculture, l'Alimentation et l'EnvironnementRan2024 to 2027Enrolled250ConditionsNon Dependant 60 to 75 Year-old Men and WomenArmsNutritional postprandial test
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Elaine HillesheimUCD Institute of Food and Health, UCD School of Agriculture and Food Science, UCD, Dublin 4, Belfield Ireland.
Miriam F RyanUCD Institute of Food and Health, UCD School of Agriculture and Food Science, UCD, Dublin 4, Belfield Ireland.
Eileen GibneyUCD Institute of Food and Health, UCD School of Agriculture and Food Science, UCD, Dublin 4, Belfield Ireland.
Helen M RocheUCD Conway Institute of Biomolecular and Biomedical Research, UCD, Dublin 4, Belfield Ireland.
Lorraine BrennanUCD Institute of Food and Health, UCD School of Agriculture and Food Science, UCD, Dublin 4, Belfield Ireland.ORCID 0000-0002-7711-7499
University College Dublin · IEFood for Health Ireland · IE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTargeted nutrition is defined as dietary advice tailored at a group level. Groups known as metabotypes can be identified based on individual metabolic profiles. Metabotypes have been associated with differential responses to diet, which support their use to deliver dietary advice. We aimed to optimise a metabotype approach to deliver targeted dietary advice by encompassing more specific recommendations on nutrient and food intakes and dietary behaviours.

methodsParticipants (n = 207) were classified into three metabotypes based on four biomarkers (triacylglycerol, total cholesterol, HDL-cholesterol and glucose) and using a k-means cluster model. Participants in metabotype-1 had the highest average HDL-cholesterol, in metabotype-2 the lowest triacylglycerol and total cholesterol, and in metabotype-3 the highest triacylglycerol and total cholesterol. For each participant, dietary advice was assigned using decision trees for both metabotype (group level) and personalised (individual level) approaches. Agreement between methods was compared at the message level and the metabotype approach was optimised to incorporate messages exclusively assigned by the personalised approach and current dietary guidelines. The optimised metabotype approach was subsequently compared with individualised advice manually compiled.

resultsThe metabotype approach comprised advice for improving the intake of saturated fat (69% of participants), fibre (66%) and salt (18%), while the personalised approach assigned advice for improving the intake of folate (63%), fibre (63%), saturated fat (61%), calcium (34%), monounsaturated fat (24%) and salt (14%). Following the optimisation of the metabotype approach, the most frequent messages assigned to address intake of key nutrients were to increase the intake of fruit and vegetables, beans and pulses, dark green vegetables, and oily fish, to limit processed meats and high-fat food products and to choose fibre-rich carbohydrates, low-fat dairy and lean meats (60-69%). An average agreement of 82.8% between metabotype and manual approaches was revealed, with excellent agreements in metabotype-1 (94.4%) and metabotype-3 (92.3%).

conclusionsThe optimised metabotype approach proved capable of delivering targeted dietary advice for healthy adults, being highly comparable with individualised advice. The next step is to ascertain whether the optimised metabotype approach is effective in changing diet quality.

Indexed as

BiomarkersCluster analysisMetabotypesPersonalised nutritionTargeted nutrition

Identifiers

PMID33005208
PMCPMC7523294
OpenAlexW3089497357

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.