Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39354608›Full record

ArticleJournal of translational medicine2024

Artificial intelligence driven definition of food preference endotypes in UK Biobank volunteers is associated with distinctive health outcomes and blood based metabolomic and proteomic profiles.

Hana F Navratilova, Anthony D Whetton, Nophar Geifman

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of translational medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Proteomics for precision nutrition: current evidence and future directions.Current opinion in clinical nutrition and metabolic care · 2026
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. 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

3 authors.

Hana F NavratilovaSchool of Biosciences, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Surrey, Guildford, GU2 7XH, UK.
Anthony D WhettonSchool of Biosciences, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Surrey, Guildford, GU2 7XH, UK.
Nophar GeifmanVeterinary Health Innovation Engine, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of Surrey, Guildford, GU2 7AL, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-2956-6676

Funding

Lembaga Pengelola Dana Pendidikan 202205080261
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSpecific food preferences can determine an individual's dietary patterns and therefore, may be associated with certain health risks and benefits.

methodsUsing food preference questionnaire (FPQ) data from a subset comprising over 180,000 UK Biobank participants, we employed Latent Profile Analysis (LPA) approach to identify the main patterns or profiles among participants. blood biochemistry across groups/profiles was compared using the non-parametric Kruskal-Wallis test. We applied the Limma algorithm for differential abundance analysis on 168 metabolites and 2923 proteins, and utilized the Database for Annotation, Visualization and Integrated Discovery (DAVID) to identify enriched biological processes and pathways. Relative risks (RR) were calculated for chronic diseases and mental conditions per group, adjusting for sociodemographic factors.

resultsBased on their food preferences, three profiles were termed: the putative Health-conscious group (low preference for animal-based or sweet foods, and high preference for vegetables and fruits), the Omnivore group (high preference for all foods), and the putative Sweet-tooth group (high preference for sweet foods and sweetened beverages). The Health-conscious group exhibited lower risk of heart failure (RR = 0.86, 95%CI 0.79-0.93) and chronic kidney disease (RR = 0.69, 95%CI 0.65-0.74) compared to the two other groups. The Sweet-tooth group had greater risk of depression (RR = 1.27, 95%CI 1.21-1.34), diabetes (RR = 1.15, 95%CI 1.01-1.31), and stroke (RR = 1.22, 95%CI 1.15-1.31) compared to the other two groups. Cancer (overall) relative risk showed little difference across the Health-conscious, Omnivore, and Sweet-tooth groups with RR of 0.98 (95%CI 0.96-1.01), 1.00 (95%CI 0.98-1.03), and 1.01 (95%CI 0.98-1.04), respectively. The Health-conscious group was associated with lower levels of inflammatory biomarkers (e.g., C-reactive Protein) which are also known to be elevated in those with common metabolic diseases (e.g., cardiovascular disease). Other markers modulated in the Health-conscious group, ketone bodies, insulin-like growth factor-binding protein (IGFBP), and Growth Hormone 1 were more abundant, while leptin was less abundant. Further, the IGFBP pathway, which influences IGF1 activity, may be significantly enhanced by dietary choices.

conclusionsThese observations align with previous findings from studies focusing on weight loss interventions, which include a reduction in leptin levels. Overall, the Health-conscious group, with preference to healthier food options, has better health outcomes, compared to Sweet-tooth and Omnivore groups.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceBiological Specimen BanksFood PreferencesMetabolomicsProteomicsAdultAgedFemaleHealthHumansMaleMetabolomeMiddle AgedSurveys and QuestionnairesUK BiobankUnited KingdomBiomarkersFood preferencesLatent Profile AnalysisMetabolomicsProteomicsRelative riskUnsupervised machine learning

Identifiers

PMID39354608
PMCPMC11443809

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.