ArticleCurrent developments in nutrition2025
Design and Implementation of the Protein-Distinct Macronutrient-Equivalent Diet (PRODMED) Study: An Eighteen-Week Randomized Crossover Feeding Trial Among Free-Living Rural Older Adults.
Article in Current developments in nutrition, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this 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.
Effect of a Pulse-based USDA-diet on Gut Microbial Metabolites and Biomarkers of Healthspan: A 18-week Randomized Controlled Crossover Feeding Study in Older Adults
The Role of Lean-pork Within a Plant-based Dietary Pattern for Improving Iron Reserve, Muscle-fitness, and Markers of Health Span in Older Adults: A Multi-disciplinary Randomized Controlled Feeding Study
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Effects of Minimally Processed Red Meat within a Plant-Forward Diet on Biomarkers of Physical and Cognitive Aging: A Randomized Controlled Crossover Feeding Trial.Current developments in nutrition · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Despite growing emphasis on plant-based eating, animal protein consumption remains high among Americans. The biological effects of different dietary protein sources within healthy plant-forward whole-diet patterns are poorly understood, and controlled-feeding methodologies for examining potential impacts are underreported. Objectives: This methods-report describes feasible approaches for menu planning and protein quality assessment within a 2-arm crossover randomized controlled feeding trial over 18 wk among rural Midwestern older adults. The primary trial aims to evaluate the effect of 2 protein-distinct diets on age-related health risk factors. The objectives of this methods-report are to Methods: Participants completed 2 8-wk feeding phases separated by a 2-wk washout; one arm consisting of 162 g/d of lean pork (meat-protein source) and the other an equivalent amount of protein from pulses (plant-protein source). These primary proteins contributed ≥45% of protein intake within a 2000 kcal/d cyclic menu. Data quality, adherence, and participant experience were assessed using descriptive and inferential statistics. Results: Macronutrient distributions of the overall diets were closely matched despite differences in primary protein densities (meat-protein source 261.7 mg/g; plant-protein source 120.6 mg/g). Both diets featured increased fiber but reduced total and saturated fats, sodium, and ultra-processed foods compared to baseline. Consumed energy, though lower than provided, was matched between the intervention arms. Conclusions: Interventions were well-received, reflecting strong participant interest in healthier eating. Results illustrate a practical, scalable method for evaluating specific protein sources within a plant-forward diet, informing future studies and consumer practices.The trials were registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT05577858 and NCT05581953.
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.