ArticleFrontiers in nutrition2024
Exploring how researchers consider nutrition trial design and participant adherence: a theory-based analysis.
Article in Frontiers in nutrition, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Diet-Related Health Recommender Systems for Patients With Chronic Health Conditions: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Nutrition trials are important for informing dietary and clinical guidelines. Central to the success of these trials is participant adherence to dietary behaviors. However, trials commonly experience poor adherence. This study seeks to understand if and how researchers consider supporting participant adherence to dietary behaviors and their relationship to using behavior change science when designing trials. Methods: A mapping exercise was undertaken to create matrices that describe the landscape of current nutrition trials. A total of 12 researchers participated in semi-structured, one-on-one interviews. Transcripts were analyzed using (i) the theoretical domains framework (TDF) to identify themes in current practice and beliefs, and (ii) the capability, opportunity, motivation, and behavior model to identify barriers and enablers to using behavior change science in the design of nutrition trials. Results: Twenty-two belief statements were identified across all 14 TDF domains and were conceptualized as 5 key themes with respect to designing nutrition trials to improve participant adherence: (i) what was done, (ii) how it was done, (iii) why it was done, (iv) adherence challenges, and (v) conflicting beliefs. Regarding using behavior change science when designing trials, some researchers felt this would be beneficial but lacked the knowledge and skills to do so, while others were skeptical of its value over the current experience-based practice. Discussion: Researchers are motivated to encourage participant adherence to dietary behaviors, and, consciously and subconsciously, implement a range of strategies through non-systematic methods in their trials. Future publications would benefit from the explicit documentation of levels of adherence to dietary behaviors and strategies implemented to improve adherence.
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.