SynthesisFrontiers in nutrition2026
Proteomic profiling in personalized nutrition: a systematic review and methodological frameworks of randomized controlled trials.
Synthesis in Frontiers in nutrition, 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
Background: Personalized nutrition aims to tailor dietary advice by accounting for interindividual variability. However, the application and integration of proteomic profiling within dietary intervention studies have not yet been systematically mapped. Methods: A PRISMA-aligned systematic review (PROSPERO CRD420251011886) of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was conducted searching PubMed, Embase, and Scopus. We included RCTs with a dietary intervention incorporating a genotype- and/or phenotype-based personalization component and protein profiling measured with high-throughput or multiplex platforms (including MS-based, aptamer-based, and multiplex immunoassays). Results: Twenty-six trials were included, with sample sizes ranging from 14 to 805 participants. Most interventions were supplementation-based ( Conclusion: In personalized nutrition RCTs, proteomic profiling is currently employed predominantly as a targeted, secondary outcome to characterize subgroup-specific molecular responses, with limited use as a tool to inform stratification or guide intervention design. Future research should prioritize adequately powered trials with pre-specified proteomic outcomes and the integration of standardized proteomic workflows to enhance interpretability and clinical translation.
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.