Trial reportThe journal of nutrition, health & aging2024
Cost-effectiveness of protein-rich meals and snacks for increasing protein intake in older adults.
Trial report in The journal of nutrition, health & aging, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Structured Exercise During and After Incretin-Based Pharmacotherapy Discontinuation: A Narrative Review of Mechanisms, Evidence, and Prescription Guidance.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Protein and Aging: Practicalities and Practice.Nutrients · 2025Review
- Pauca verba on the association between protein intake and sarcopenia in older adults.The journal of nutrition, health & aging · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo investigate the cost-effectiveness of protein-rich meals and snacks for increasing protein intake in home-dwelling older adults.
designCost effectiveness analysis from a randomized controlled trial, the Power Meals study.
settingParticipants were randomized into one of three groups for eight weeks: a protein-rich meal, snack and bread (Protein), a regular meal (Normal) and a control group without meal service (Control).
participantsHome-dwelling home care clients, caregivers and care recipients aged ≥65 years (n = 65). MEASUREMENTS: Protein intake was assessed by a three-day food diary at the end of the study. Cost for the daily diet was estimated by using Finnish grocery store databases and the prices of the food service. The cost-effectiveness was assessed by an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER).
resultsCosts for the daily diet in the Protein (8.35 €/d) and the Normal (7.94 €/d) groups were significantly higher than in the control group (5.65 €/d) (p < 0.001). Incremental cost-effectiveness analysis showed that increasing protein intake was cost-effective in the Protein group as incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was 8.11 in the Protein, 8.72 in the Normal and 6.45 in the Control group.
conclusionsIncluding protein rich meals and snacks in a diet increases protein intake in home-dwelling older adults cost-effectively.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
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.