ArticleNutrients2024
Educational Intervention Boosts Dietitians' Knowledge of the Safety and Approval of Low- and No-Calorie Sweeteners.
Article in Nutrients, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
objectivesLow- and no-calorie sweeteners (LNCSs) provide sweetness in food applications that are suggested to support consumers' reduced consumption of caloric sweeteners and added sugar intake. Consumers seek guidance and advice on using LNCSs from healthcare providers, including dietitians and nutritionists. However, prior research suggests there may be inconsistent guidance on the use of LNCSs. The main goal is to assess dietitians' and nutritionists' perceptions and knowledge of LNCSs. We also evaluate the impact of educational intervention on the perceptions and knowledge of low- and no-calorie sweeteners (LNCSs) among healthcare professionals.
methodsParticipants completed an online questionnaire on their perceptions of LNCSs before and after viewing a webinar given by a member of the FDA on the safety and approval process of LNCSs. A total of 187 participants completed the pre-questionnaire, and 58 participants completed the post-questionnaire.
resultsThe LNCSs most familiar to participants was aspartame, followed by stevia, with thaumatin, advantame, and neotame being the least familiar sweeteners. While all sweeteners were FDA-approved, there were differences in perceived safety and suitability for dietary use. Following the intervention, there was a significant improvement in the participant's knowledge, understanding, and confidence in the safety and approval process of LNCSs and reduced negative perceptions of LNCSs on health.
conclusionsWith nutritionists and dietitians being the primary sources of nutritional guidance, consumers may seek their recommendations regarding using LNCSs. However, this study revealed differences in suitability across FDA-approved LNCSs and a lack of confidence regarding the safety and approval process. Education programs regarding the safety and approval process of LNCSs increase confidence in advising patients and clients on the use of LNCSs.
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.