Evidence mapPaperPMID 36940903Full record

SynthesisAdvances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.)2023

Commonalities among Dietary Recommendations from 2010 to 2021 Clinical Practice Guidelines: A Meta-Epidemiological Study from the American College of Lifestyle Medicine.

Kelly C Cara, David M Goldman, Brooke K Kollman, Stas S Amato, Martin D Tull, Micaela C Karlsen

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Advances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
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

24 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

6 authors.

Kelly C CaraAmerican College of Lifestyle Medicine, Chesterfield, MO, United States; Division of Nutrition Epidemiology and Data Science, Friedman School of Nutrition Science and Policy, Tufts University, Boston, MA, United States.
David M GoldmanGame Changers Institute, Laguna Niguel, CA, United States.
Brooke K KollmanThe Integrative Medicine Center of Western Colorado, Grand Junction, CO, United States.
Stas S AmatoDepartment of General Surgery, University of Vermont Medical Center, Burlington, VT, United States.
Martin D TullAmerican College of Lifestyle Medicine, Chesterfield, MO, United States.
Micaela C KarlsenAmerican College of Lifestyle Medicine, Chesterfield, MO, United States; Applied Nutrition and Global Public Health, University of New England, Biddeford, ME, United States. Electronic address: mkarlsen@lifestylemedicine.org.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) provide recommendations to clinicians based on current medical knowledge to guide and reduce variability in clinical care. With advances in nutrition science research, CPGs increasingly include dietary guidance; however, the degree of consistency in dietary recommendations across CPGs has not been investigated. Using a systematic review approach adapted for meta-epidemiologic research, this study compared dietary guidance from current guidelines developed by governments, major medical professional societies, and large health stakeholder associations owing to their often well-defined and standardized processes for guideline development. CPGs making recommendations for dietary patterns and food groups or components for generally healthy adults or those with prespecified chronic diseases were eligible. Literature from January 2010 to January 2022 was searched in 5 bibliographic databases and augmented by searches in point-of-care resource databases and relevant websites. Reporting followed an adapted PRISMA statement and included narrative synthesis and summary tables. Seventy-eight CPGs for major chronic conditions (autoimmune, 7; cancers, 5; cardiovascular-related, 35; digestive, 11; diabetes, 12; weight-related, 4; or multiple, 3) and general health promotion (n = 1) were included. Nearly, all (91%) made dietary pattern recommendations, and approximately half (49%) endorsed patterns centered on plant foods. Overall, CPGs were most closely aligned in promoting consumption of major plant food groups (vegetables = 74% of CPGs, fruit = 69%, whole grains = 58%), whereas discouraging intake of alcohol (62%) and salt or sodium (56%). CVD and diabetes CPGs were similarly aligned with additional messaging to consume legumes/pulses (60% of CVD CPGs; 75%, diabetes), nuts and seeds (67%, CVD), and low-fat dairy (60%, CVD). Diabetes guidelines discouraged sweets/added sugars (67%) and sweetened beverages (58%). This alignment across CPGs should boost clinician confidence in relaying such dietary guidance to patients in accordance with their relevant CPGs. This trial was registered at the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero; PROSPERO 2021) as CRD42021226281.

Indexed as

Cardiovascular DiseasesDietAdultFruitHumansLife StyleUnited StatesVegetablesbest practicechronic diseasediethealth promotionhealthy dietmeta-epidemiologicalpoint-of-care systemspractice guidelinesystematic review

Identifiers

PMID36940903
PMCPMC10201822

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.