Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40738847›Full record

ReviewThe British journal of nutrition2025

Updating the Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition's Framework for the evaluation of evidence.

Mamta Singh, Rachel Elsom, Adrienne Cullum, Russell J de Souza, Darren C Greenwood, David J Mela, Ken K Ong, Ian S Young, Julie A Lovegrove, Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition (SACN)

Erratum issuedAbstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in The British journal of nutrition, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Mamta SinghSACN Secretariat, Office for Health Improvement and Disparities (OHID), Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC), 39 Victoria Street, LondonSW1H 0EU, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0006-4097-2199
Rachel ElsomSACN Secretariat, Office for Health Improvement and Disparities (OHID), Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC), 39 Victoria Street, LondonSW1H 0EU, UK.
Adrienne CullumSACN Secretariat, Office for Health Improvement and Disparities (OHID), Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC), 39 Victoria Street, LondonSW1H 0EU, UK.
Russell J de SouzaMembers of SACN Subgroup on the Framework and Methods for the Evaluation of Evidence that Relates Foods and Nutrients to Health, OHID, DHSC, 39 Victoria Street, LondonSW1H 0EU, UK.
Darren C GreenwoodMembers of SACN Subgroup on the Framework and Methods for the Evaluation of Evidence that Relates Foods and Nutrients to Health, OHID, DHSC, 39 Victoria Street, LondonSW1H 0EU, UK.
David J MelaMembers of SACN Subgroup on the Framework and Methods for the Evaluation of Evidence that Relates Foods and Nutrients to Health, OHID, DHSC, 39 Victoria Street, LondonSW1H 0EU, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1824-4305
Ken K OngMembers of SACN Subgroup on the Framework and Methods for the Evaluation of Evidence that Relates Foods and Nutrients to Health, OHID, DHSC, 39 Victoria Street, LondonSW1H 0EU, UK.
Ian S YoungMembers of SACN Subgroup on the Framework and Methods for the Evaluation of Evidence that Relates Foods and Nutrients to Health, OHID, DHSC, 39 Victoria Street, LondonSW1H 0EU, UK.
Julie A LovegroveChair of SACN Subgroup on the Framework and Methods for the Evaluation of Evidence that Relates Foods and Nutrients to Health, London, UK.
Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition (SACN)

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition (SACN) provides independent advice on nutrition and related health matters to UK government organisations. In keeping with its commitment to openness and transparency, SACN follows a set 'Framework' to ensure a prescribed and consistent approach is taken in all its evidence evaluations. Following an update of the SACN Framework in 2020, which addressed some straightforward issues, the SACN Framework subgroup was established in 2021 to consider more complex matters that were not addressed in the 2020 update. The SACN Framework subgroup considered four main topics for update: (1) the different types of evidence evaluations produced by SACN, (2) interpretation of statistical data, (3) tools for assessment of study quality and (4) tools to assess the certainty of a body of evidence for exposure-outcome relationships. The Framework subgroup agreed clear definitions and processes for the different types of evidence evaluations produced by SACN and agreed that interpretation of

Indexed as

Advisory CommitteesEvidence-Based MedicineNutritional SciencesNutrition PolicyHumansUnited KingdomAssessing evidence certaintyAssessing evidence qualityEvidence evaluationFrameworkInterpreting statistical dataSACN

Identifiers

PMID40738847
PMCPMC12491393

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.