Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39882294›Full record

ArticleBMJ nutrition, prevention & health2024

Nutrition users' guides: systematic reviews part 1 -structured guide for methodological assessment, interpretation and application of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of non-randomised nutritional epidemiology studies.

Dena Zeraatkar, Russell J de Souza, Gordon H Guyatt, Malgorzata M Bala, Pablo Alonso-Coello, Bradley C Johnston

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ nutrition, prevention & health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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.

Dena ZeraatkarDepartment of Health Research Methods, Evidence & Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Russell J de SouzaDepartment of Health Research Methods, Evidence & Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Gordon H GuyattDepartment of Health Research Methods, Evidence & Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Malgorzata M BalaChair of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, Department of Hygiene and Dietetics, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Krakow, Poland.
Pablo Alonso-CoelloIberomerican Cochrane Centre, Clinical Epidemiology and Public Health Department, Institute of Biomedical Research of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
Bradley C JohnstonDepartment of Nutrition, College of Agriculture and Life Sciences, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-8872-8626

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Due to the challenges of conducting randomised controlled trials (randomised trials) of dietary interventions, evidence in nutrition often comes from non-randomised (observational) studies of nutritional exposures-called nutritional epidemiology studies. When using systematic reviews of such studies to advise patients or populations on optimal dietary habits, users of the evidence (eg, healthcare professionals such as clinicians, health service and policy workers) should first evaluate the rigour (validity) and utility (applicability) of the systematic review. Issues in making this judgement include whether the review addressed a sensible question; included an exhaustive literature search; was scrupulous in the selection of studies and the collection of data; and presented results in a useful manner. For sufficiently rigorous and useful reviews, evidence users must subsequently evaluate the certainty of the findings, which depends on assessments of risk of bias, inconsistency, imprecision, indirectness, effect size, dose-response and the likelihood of publication bias. Given the challenges of nutritional epidemiology, evidence users need to be diligent in assessing whether studies provide evidence of sufficient certainty to allow confident recommendations for patients regarding nutrition and dietary interventions.

Indexed as

Critical appraisalDietary patternsEvidence based practiceMedical educationNutritionNutritional treatment

Identifiers

PMID39882294
PMCPMC11773667

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.