Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26584807›Full record

ArticleGenes & nutrition2015

Nutritional biology: a neglected basic discipline of nutritional science.

Frank Döring, Alexander Ströhle

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Genes & nutrition, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 26% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. IsGenes & nutrition · 2019
    Article
  2. 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 1 institution in 1 country.

Frank DöringDepartment of Molecular Prevention, Institute of Human Nutrition and Nutritional Science, Kiel University, Heinrich-Hecht-Platz 10, 24118, Kiel, Germany. sek@molprev.uni-kiel.de.
Alexander StröhleDepartment of Nutritional Physiology and Human Nutrition, Institute of Food Science and Human Nutrition, Leibniz University Hanover, Am Kleinen Felde 30, 30167, Hanover, Germany.
Kiel University · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

On the basis of a scientific-philosophical analysis, this paper tries to show that the approaches in current nutritional science-including its subdisciplines which focus on molecular aspects-are predominantly application-oriented. This becomes particularly evident through a number of conceptual problems characterized by the triad of 'dearth of theoretical foundation,' 'particularist research questions,' and 'reductionist understanding of nutrition.' The thesis presented here is that an interpretive framework based on nutritional biology is able to shed constructive light on the fundamental problems of nutritional science. In this context, the establishment of 'nutritional biology' as a basic discipline in research and education would be a first step toward recognizing the phenomenon of 'nutrition' as an oecic process as a special case of an organism-environment interaction. Modern nutritional science should be substantively grounded on ecological-and therefore systems biology as well as organismic-principles. The aim of nutritional biology, then, should be to develop near-universal 'law statements' in nutritional science-a task which presents a major challenge for the current science system.

Indexed as

Nutritional biologyNutritional scienceOrganism–environment interactionReductionism

Identifiers

PMID26584807
PMCPMC4653117
OpenAlexW2178193754

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.