Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24557632›Full record

ReviewJournal of bone and mineral metabolism2014

The acid-ash hypothesis revisited: a reassessment of the impact of dietary acidity on bone.

Rachel Nicoll, John McLaren Howard

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of bone and mineral metabolism, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 18% of its field
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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Rachel NicollDepartment of Public Health and Clinical Medicine and Heart Centre, Umea University, Umeå, Sweden, rachelnicoll25@gmail.com.
John McLaren Howard
Acumen (United States) · USUmeå University · SE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The acid-ash hypothesis states that when there are excess blood protons, bone is eroded to provide alkali to buffer the net acidity and maintain physiologic pH. There is concern that with the typical Western diet, we are permanently in a state of net endogenous acid production, which is gradually reducing bone. While it is clear that a high acid-producing diet generates increased urinary acid and calcium excretion, the effect of diet does not always have the expected results on BMD, fracture risk and markers of bone formation and resorption, suggesting that other factors are influencing the effect of acid/alkali loading on bone. High dietary protein, sodium and phosphorus intake, all of which are necessary for bone formation, were thought to be net acid forming and contribute to low BMD and fracture risk, but appear under certain conditions to be beneficial, with the effect of protein being driven by calcium repletion. Dietary salt can increase short-term markers of bone resorption but may also trigger 1,25(OH)2D synthesis to increase calcium absorption; with low calcium intake, salt intake may be inversely correlated with BMD but with high calcium intake, salt intake was positively correlated with BMD. With respect to the effect of phosphorus, the data are conflicting. Inclusion of an analysis of calcium intake may help to reconcile the contradictory results seen in many of the studies of bone. The acid-ash hypothesis could, therefore, be amended to state that with an acid-producing diet and low calcium intake, bone is eroded to provide alkali to buffer excess protons but where calcium intake is high the acid-producing diet may be protective.

Indexed as

AcidsBone and BonesCalciumDietHumansHydrogen-Ion ConcentrationModels, BiologicalAcidsCalcium

Identifiers

PMID24557632
OpenAlexW2082966754

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.