SynthesisFrontiers in nutrition2026
The association of communal vs. solitary dining on nutritional intake and depression risk in older adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
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: Global population aging and the transition toward empty-nest households have sharply increased solitary dining. This change in meal pattern is a key concern in geriatric health. Objective: To quantify the differences in dietary intake and depression risk between communal and solitary dining among community-dwelling older adults. Methods: Following PRISMA guidelines, we synthesized evidence from PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane Library from database inception through December 2025. Effect sizes were pooled using random-effects models. The PROSPERO registration of this systematic review and meta-analysis is CRD420251177507. Results: Of 12,088 records screened, 21 studies were included (11 Japan, 4 South Korea, 3 USA, 1 UK, 1 China, 1 Brazil, 1 Sweden; 16 high-quality, 5 moderate-quality per AHRQ). Compared to solitary dining, commensality is significantly associated with higher total energy intake (MD = 109.51 kcal, 17.39-201.62; Conclusions: Communal dining is associated with a reduced risk of nutritional inadequacy and psychological distress through integrated mechanisms of social engagement and dietary diversification. Our findings support the inclusion of commensality as a strategic, non-pharmacological component in global geriatric health policy. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD420251177507, identifier: CRD420251177507.
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.