Evidence mapPaperPMID 34836004Full record

ArticleNutrients2021

Evidence Use in the Development of the Australian Dietary Guidelines: A Qualitative Study.

Kate Wingrove, Mark A Lawrence, Cherie Russell, Sarah A McNaughton

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nutrients, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
field-weighted citation impact
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Are the Australian Dietary Guidelines Fit for Purpose for Culturally Diverse Populations? A Qualitative Study.Health promotion journal of Australia : official journal of Australian Association of Health Promotion Professionals · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
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

4 authors.

Kate WingroveInstitute for Physical Activity and Nutrition (IPAN), School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Deakin University, Geelong 3220, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-3249-7747
Mark A LawrenceInstitute for Physical Activity and Nutrition (IPAN), School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Deakin University, Geelong 3220, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-6899-3983
Cherie RussellInstitute for Physical Activity and Nutrition (IPAN), School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Deakin University, Geelong 3220, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-1251-4810
Sarah A McNaughtonInstitute for Physical Activity and Nutrition (IPAN), School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Deakin University, Geelong 3220, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-5936-9820

Funding

Australian Government Research Training Program Scholarship
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Dietary guidelines are important nutrition policy reference standards that should be informed by the best available evidence. The types of evidence that are reviewed and the evidence review methods that are used have implications for evidence translation. The aim of this study was to explore perceived advantages, disadvantages, and practicalities associated with the synthesis and translation of evidence from nutrient-based, food-based, and dietary patterns research in dietary guideline development. A qualitative descriptive study was conducted. Twenty-two semi-structured interviews were conducted with people involved in the development of the 2013 Australian Dietary Guidelines (ADGs). Transcripts were analysed thematically. To inform future ADGs, there was support for reviewing evidence on a range of dietary exposures (including dietary patterns, foods and food groups, nutrients and food components, and eating occasions) and health outcomes, as well as evidence on environmental sustainability and equity. At the evidence synthesis stage, practicalities associated with planning the evidence review and conducting original systematic reviews were discussed. At the evidence translation stage, practicalities associated with integrating the evidence and consulting stakeholders were described. To ensure that the best available evidence is translated into future ADGs, evidence review methods should be selected based on the exposures and outcomes of interest.

Indexed as

Nutrition PolicyQualitative ResearchAustraliaDietHumansOutcome Assessment, Health CareSystematic Reviews as Topicdietary guidelinesdietary patternsevidence synthesisevidence translationqualitative research

Identifiers

PMID34836004
PMCPMC8620517

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.