ArticleFrontiers in nutrition2025
Pulse consumption trends in the US in the context of 2025-30 Dietary Guidelines for Americans: analyses of NHANES data for 1999-2018.
Article in Frontiers in nutrition, 2025. 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.
- Article
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
Background: The 2025-30 US Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee has recommended moving pulses to the Protein Foods Group and listing them ahead of meat, poultry, and eggs. The recommended amounts went up from 1.5 to 2.5 cups/week per 2,000 kcal daily. Objective: To track temporal trends in pulse consumption in the US from 1999 to 2018 by consumer socio-demographics and by pulse type. Methods: Dietary intakes data came from 10 cycles of the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES 1999-2018). Adult participants were stratified by sex, age group, income to poverty ratio (IPR), education, and race/ethnicity Pulses were separated into beans, chickpeas, peas, and lentils. Analyses were conducted for the whole sample ( Results: Across all years tested, only 17.2% of NHANES participants consumed any pulses on a given day. Mean prevalence was highest among Mexican Americans (33.3%) and lowest among non-Hispanic Black groups (12.0%). Consumption prevalence dropped after 1999-2000 but recovered after 2007-08. Mean consumption of cooked pulses was 0.39 oz/day overall and 2.26 oz/day among consumers. Higher amounts were consumed by Mexican Americans, men, and groups with lower education and incomes. In 2017-2018, 19.9% of the population consumed 1.5 cups/week of cooked pulses and 10.9% consumed 2.5 cups/week. Beans were the most consumed pulse followed by lentils, chickpeas, and peas. Unlike beans, both lentils and chickpeas were associated with higher socioeconomic status. Conclusion: Other than among Mexican Americans, pulse consumption in the US was low and was associated with lower education and incomes. However, pulse consumers consumed substantial amounts. Lentils and chickpeas may represent opportunities for increasing pulse consumption. The present findings are relevant to the implementation of the 2025-30 Dietary Guidelines for Americans and can help target the promotion of pulses among population subgroups.
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.