ReviewMissouri medicine
Problems with the 2015 Dietary Guidelines for Americans: An Alternative.
Review in Missouri medicine. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- The effects of green coffee extract supplementation on glycemic indices and lipid profile in adults: a systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis of clinical trials.Nutrition journal · 2020Pooled it
- Effect of probiotic Lactobacillus on lipid profile: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized, controlled trials.PloS one · 2017Pooled it
- Enhanced Labeling to Promote Consumption of Nutrient Dense Foods and Healthier Diets.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Lactiplantibacillus plantarum strains KABP011, KABP012, and KABP013 modulate bile acids and cholesterol metabolism in humans.Cardiovascular research · 2024Article
- Effect of vitamin D supplementation on type 2 diabetes biomarkers: an umbrella of interventional meta-analyses.Diabetology & metabolic syndrome · 2023Review
- Article
- Association between coffee consumption with serum lipid profile in ELSA-Brasil study: a metabolomic approach.European journal of nutrition · 2022Article
- Basics of Sustainable Diets and Tools for Assessing Dietary Sustainability: A Primer for Researchers and Policy Actors.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- A Lard and Soybean Oil Mixture Alleviates Low-Fat-High-Carbohydrate Diet-Induced Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease in Mice.Nutrients · 2022Article
- Multi-omic analysis in transgenic mice implicates omega-6/omega-3 fatty acid imbalance as a risk factor for chronic disease.Communications biology · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Abstract The updated 2015 Dietary Guidelines for Americans, published in January 2016, have stirred much controversy since the advisory report first appeared. Several important changes have been made, with some recommendations having greater scientific evidence for their support than others. The focus of this review is to discuss specific recommendations from the 2015 Dietary Guidelines for Americans that lack sound scientific evidence; these include: 1) Allowing approximately half of all grains to be refined; 2) The continued recommendations for fat-free or low-fat dairy and limitation of saturated fat intake to < 10% of calories; 3) Sodium intake < 2,300 mg/day; and 4) Consumption of up to 27 grams/day of "oils" (high in polyunsaturated fat or monounsaturated fat). Based on our review, the aforementioned recommendations found in the updated 2015 Dietary Guideline for Americans may increase the incidence of cardiometabolic disease, diabetes, obesity, dyslipidemia, cardiovascular disease, and possibly cancer.
Indexed as
Identifiers
27311214PMC6139952What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.