Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41896258›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2026

Development and validation of a tool for detecting misinformation risk in diet, nutrition, and health content (Diet-MisRAT).

Alex Ruani, Michael J Reiss, Anastasia Z Kalea

Abstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

3 authors.

Alex RuaniCurriculum, Pedagogy and Assessment, Institute of Education, University College London, London, WC1H 0AL, UK. maria.ruani.17@ucl.ac.uk.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8191-0166
Michael J ReissCurriculum, Pedagogy and Assessment, Institute of Education, University College London, London, WC1H 0AL, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1207-4229
Anastasia Z KaleaFaculty of Medical Sciences, Division of Medicine, University College London, London, WC1E 6BT, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5775-3984

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Misinformation in diet and nutrition is recognised as a major public health threat, with the potential to misguide dietary choices and contribute to preventable harm. To address this, we developed a Misinformation Risk Assessment Model (MisRAM), grounded in the World Health Organization’s hazard risk assessment principles. MisRAM conceptualises misleading content traits as stratifiable agents of informational adverse effects, weighed by their severity and likelihood of increasing recipient susceptibility. Building on this model, we designed the Diet-Nutrition Misinformation Risk Assessment Tool (Diet-MisRAT), a structured instrument that evaluates medium-to-long form content across four risk dimensions (inaccuracy, incompleteness, deceptiveness, health harm), yielding five-tier risk estimates from very low to very high. Validation involved five rounds: expert reviewers, trainee dietitians, postgraduate nutrition students, highly experienced nutrition professionals, and zero-shot prompt-based generative-AI risk detection. Results showed strong to very strong alignment with expert-derived benchmarks, supporting the tool’s interpretability and concurrent validity. ChatGPT demonstrated high test–retest reliability, accuracy, precision, sensitivity, and F1 scores under blinded untuned conditions, suggesting that adequately constructed, expert-designed prompting tools may help overcome training-dataset limitations. Diet-MisRAT offers a scalable, graded alternative to binary detection. Domain-calibrated risk stratification could guide proportionate interventions in content oversight, regulation, education, misinformation inoculation, and infodemic mitigation.

Indexed as

CommunicationDietHumansReproducibility of ResultsRisk AssessmentChatGPTDiet and nutrition misinformation detectionHuman-in-the-loop artificial intelligenceInfodemic managementMedia literacyMisinformation inoculationMisinformation risk assessmentPublic health communication

Identifiers

PMID41896258
PMCPMC13031550

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.