Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23642200›Full record

ReviewAnnual review of nutrition2013

Quantifying diet for nutrigenomic studies.

Katherine L Tucker, Caren E Smith, Chao-Qiang Lai, Jose M Ordovas

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Annual review of nutrition, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

28 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Observational
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
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

4 authors.

Katherine L TuckerDepartment of Health Sciences, Northeastern University, Boston, MA 02115, USA. kl.tucker@neu.edu
Caren E Smith
Chao-Qiang Lai
Jose M Ordovas

Funding

STATISTICSP50HL105185 · NHLBI · UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS LOWELL · PI TUCKER, KATHERINE L · 2010 to 2015
$10.4M
NHLBI NIH HHS P50 HL105185NIMHD NIH HHS L60 MD003562
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The field of nutrigenomics shows tremendous promise for improved understanding of the effects of dietary intake on health. The knowledge that metabolic pathways may be altered in individuals with genetic variants in the presence of certain dietary exposures offers great potential for personalized nutrition advice. However, although considerable resources have gone into improving technology for measurement of the genome and biological systems, dietary intake assessment remains inadequate. Each of the methods currently used has limitations that may be exaggerated in the context of gene × nutrient interaction in large multiethnic studies. Because of the specificity of most gene × nutrient interactions, valid data are needed for nutrient intakes at the individual level. Most statistical adjustment efforts are designed to improve estimates of nutrient intake distributions in populations and are unlikely to solve this problem. An improved method of direct measurement of individual usual dietary intake that is unbiased across populations is urgently needed.

Indexed as

DietGene Expression RegulationNutrition AssessmentGenome-Wide Association StudyHumansNutrigenomicsPrecision Medicine

Identifiers

PMID23642200
PMCPMC4354857

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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 OpenQuestion graph.