ReviewNutrition & metabolism2026
Effects of personalized nutrition on cardiometabolic biomarkers in adults with overweight or obesity: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Review in Nutrition & metabolism, 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposePersonalized nutrition (PN) shows promise for improving cardiometabolic health; however, evidence on its summarized methodologies and effectiveness remains limited and inconsistent. This review evaluates the effects of PN interventions on cardiometabolic outcomes in adults with overweight or obesity.
methodsWe searched five databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published up to March 2026. Eligible RCTs included at least one biological component to guide personalized dietary advice. Data were pooled using a random-effects meta-analysis, with heterogeneity assessed by Cochran's Q statistic and quantified using I2. Risk of bias and certainty of evidence were assessed.
resultsFifteen RCTs met the inclusion criteria, each comparing PN with standard, non-personalized dietary interventions. PN implementation varied substantially in the quantity and type of individual-level features, algorithms applied, and personalization strategies used. No significant differences were observed between PN and controls in energy intake or macronutrient composition. 46.7% employed specific dietary patterns as controls or withheld nutritional counseling. Pooled analyses showed slightly greater reductions in body weight and body fat in the PN group compared with controls, but no effects on body mass index, waist circumference, lipid profile, or glycemic markers. GRADE certainty ranged from moderate to very low across the assessed outcomes.
conclusionPN interventions modestly reduce body weight and body fat. Importantly, the absence of a standardized PN framework hampers evaluation and comparison of the effectiveness of nutritional personalization strategies. Future research should aim to establish standardized PN definitions, harmonized individual-level features, and transparent reporting. REGISTRY AND REGISTRY NUMBER FOR SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS OR META-ANALYSES: CRD420251134855.
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.