Evidence mapPaperPMID 39420556Full record

SynthesisNutrition reviews2025

Do Personalized Nutrition Interventions Improve Dietary Intake and Risk Factors in Adults With Elevated Cardiovascular Disease Risk Factors? A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Victoria Cross, Jordan Stanford, María Gómez-Martín, Clare E Collins, Seaton Robertson, Erin D Clarke

Abstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Nutrition reviews, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing 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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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

6 authors.

Victoria CrossSchool of Health Sciences, College of Health, Medicine and Wellbeing, The University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW 2308, Australia.
Jordan StanfordSchool of Health Sciences, College of Health, Medicine and Wellbeing, The University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW 2308, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-3541-8960
María Gómez-MartínSchool of Health Sciences, College of Health, Medicine and Wellbeing, The University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW 2308, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-7300-7471
Clare E CollinsSchool of Health Sciences, College of Health, Medicine and Wellbeing, The University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW 2308, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-3298-756X
Seaton RobertsonSchool of Health Sciences, College of Health, Medicine and Wellbeing, The University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW 2308, Australia.
Erin D ClarkeSchool of Health Sciences, College of Health, Medicine and Wellbeing, The University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW 2308, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-8250-5990

Funding

National Health and Medical Research Council of AustraliaNational Health and Medical Research Council of Australia Investigator
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

contextDietary modifications can improve cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factors. Personalized nutrition (PN) refers to individualized nutrition care based on genetic, phenotypic, medical, behavioral, and/or lifestyle characteristics. PN may be beneficial in improving CVD risk factors, including diet. However, this has not been reviewed previously.

objectiveThe aim was to evaluate the effectiveness of PN interventions on CVD risk factors and diet in adults at elevated CVD risk. DATA SOURCES: Six databases were searched for randomized controlled trials published between 2000 and 2023 that tested the impact of PN interventions on CVD risk factors in people at elevated risk. DATA EXTRACTION: Risk of bias was assessed using the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics Quality Criteria checklist. Data synthesis of eligible articles included participant characteristics, intervention details, and change in primary CVD risk factor outcomes, including blood pressure (BP), plasma lipids, and CVD risk score, and secondary risk factors, including anthropometric outcomes and diet quality. Random-effects meta-analyses were conducted to explore weighted mean differences (WMDs) in change or final mean values for studies with comparable data (studies with dietary counseling interventions) for outcomes including BP, blood lipids, and anthropometric measurements. DATA ANALYSIS: Of 7676 identified articles, 16 articles representing 15 studies met the inclusion criteria. Studies included between 40 and 563 participants and reported outcomes for CVD risk factors, including hyperlipidemia (n = 5), elevated BP (n = 3), overweight/obesity (n = 1), and multiple risk factors (n = 6). Risk of bias was low. Results suggested potential benefit of PN on systolic BP (WMD: -1.91; 95% CI: -3.51, -0.31 mmHg) and diastolic BP (WMD: -1.49; 95% CI: -2.39, -0.58 mmHg) and dietary intake in individuals at high CVD risk. Results were inconsistent for plasma lipid and anthropometric outcomes.

conclusionResults were promising for PN interventions that used dietary counseling on CVD risk factors in at-risk individuals. However, further evidence for other personalization methods is required, including improving methodological quality and longer study duration in future PN interventions. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: OpenScience Framework (https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/SHVWP).

Indexed as

Cardiovascular DiseasesDietHeart Disease Risk FactorsNutrition TherapyPrecision MedicineAdultHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicRisk Factorscardiovascular diseasedietmedical nutrition therapypersonalized nutritionrisk factors

Identifiers

PMID39420556
PMCPMC12166176

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.