Trial reportNutrients2016
Compliance, Palatability and Feasibility of PALEOLITHIC and Australian Guide to Healthy Eating Diets in Healthy Women: A 4-Week Dietary Intervention.
Trial report in Nutrients, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Effects of a Paleolithic Diet on Cardiovascular Disease Risk Factors: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.Advances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.) · 2019Pooled it
- Trial
- Development of a Novel Six-Month Nutrition Intervention for a Randomized Trial in Older Men with Mobility Limitations.The journal of nutrition, health & aging · 2017Trial
- The Effect of an Autoimmune Protocol (AIP) Diet in Adults With Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Single Arm Crossover Pilot Feasibility Study.Musculoskeletal care · 2026Article
- Developing and Piloting a Novel Ranking System to Assess Popular Dietary Patterns and Healthy Eating Principles.Nutrients · 2022Article
- Anti-Inflammatory Diet for Women with Interstitial Cystitis/Bladder Pain Syndrome: The AID-IC Pilot Study.Methods and protocols · 2022Article
- Protein intake is more stable than carbohydrate or fat intake across various US demographic groups and international populations.The American journal of clinical nutrition · 2020Article
- Plant-Dominant Low-Protein Diet for Conservative Management of Chronic Kidney Disease.Nutrients · 2020Review
- An Approach to Obesity Management for Gastroenterologists and Hepatologists.Current treatment options in gastroenterology · 2019Review
- Palaeolithic Diet in Diabesity and Endocrinopathies - A Vegan's Perspective.European endocrinology · 2019Review
- Popular Weight Loss Strategies: a Review of Four Weight Loss Techniques.Current gastroenterology reports · 2017Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
(1) BACKGROUND/
objectivesThe Paleolithic diet has been receiving media coverage in Australia and claims to improve overall health. The diet removes grains and dairy, whilst encouraging consumption of fruits, vegetables, meat, eggs and nuts. Our aim was to compare the diet to the Australian Guide to Healthy Eating (AGHE) in terms of compliance, palatability and feasibility; (2) SUBJECTS/
methods39 healthy women (age 47 ± 13 years, BMI 27 ± 4 kg/m²) were randomised to an ad-libitum Paleolithic (n = 22) or AGHE diet (n = 17) for 4-weeks. A food checklist was completed daily, with mean discretionary consumption (serves/day) calculated to assess compliance. A 12-item questionnaire was administered post intervention to assess palatability and feasibility; (3)
resultsThe AGHE group reported greater daily consumption of discretionary items (1.0 + 0.6 vs. 0.57 + 0.6 serves/day, p = 0.03). Compared to the AGHE group, the Paleolithic group reported a significantly greater number of events of diarrhoea (23%, 0%, p = 0.046), costs associated with grocery shopping (69%, 6% p < 0.01) and belief that the diet was not healthy (43%, 0% p < 0.01); (4)
conclusionsCompliance to both diets was high but the potential side effects and increased cost suggest that the Paleolithic diet may not be practical in clinical/public health settings. Further studies are required to assess longer term feasibility.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.