SynthesisBMC gastroenterology2025
Comparative efficacy of different diet modalities on metabolic profiles and liver functions in metabolic dysfunction-associated fatty liver disease: a network meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC gastroenterology, 2025. 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
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundMetabolic dysfunction-associated fatty liver disease (MAFLD) is a global public health challenge that is primarily managed through lifestyle interventions, particularly diet. This network meta-analysis aimed to thoroughly evaluate the effectiveness of four different dietary patterns: Mediterranean diet (MD), intermittent fasting (IF), Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension (DASH), and low-fat diet (LF) in improving liver function and metabolic profiles in adults diagnosed with MAFLD.
methodsIn accordance with the PRISMA guidelines, we conducted a search in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov, and WHO-ICTRP for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) up to Oct. 19, 2025, and registered the study on PROSPERO (CRD42024609524). The Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool 2.0 was used to evaluate study quality, and the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) was used to rank the intervention effects.
resultsIF emerged as the most effective intervention for weight loss (WMD = -1.96 kg, 95% CI -3.01,-0.92) and reducing waist circumference (WMD = -1.73 cm, 95% CI -2.89,-0.57). Sensitivity analysis indicated that intensive IF regimens might drive stronger improvements than time-restricted feeding. The MD ranked highest for improving hepatic pathology, showing statistically significant reductions in intrahepatic lipid (IHL) (WMD = -1.68%, 95% CI -3.21, -0.16), and triglycerides (WMD = -22.54 mg/dL, 95% CI -42.79, -2.29).
conclusionsIF and MD demonstrate distinct therapeutic profiles for MAFLD. IF serves as a robust strategy for weight management, particularly with more intensive regimens. Conversely, the MD demonstrates potential as a favorable strategy for targeting hepatic steatosis and lipid metabolism disorders. Therefore, clinicians are advised to adopt a personalized strategy, tailoring dietary prescriptions to the patient's primary metabolic characteristics, pending validation from high-quality, long-term RCTs.
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.