ReviewThe American journal of clinical nutrition2017
Options for basing Dietary Reference Intakes (DRIs) on chronic disease endpoints: report from a joint US-/Canadian-sponsored working group.
Review in The American journal of clinical nutrition, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 53 papers, 7 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
53 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Vitamin D intakes and health outcomes in infants and preschool children: Summary of an evidence report.Annals of medicine · 2022Pooled it
- Neuronutraceuticals Combating Neuroinflammaging: Molecular Insights and Translational Challenges-A Systematic Review.Nutrients · 2022Pooled it
- Are all dietary fibers equal for patients with inflammatory bowel disease? A systematic review of randomized controlled trials.Nutrition reviews · 2022Pooled it
- Pooled it
- The Effects of Private Health Insurance on Universal Health Coverage Objectives in China: A Systematic Literature Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020Pooled it
- Combinations of Epidemiological and Experimental Studies in Air Pollution Research: A Narrative Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020Pooled it
- Dietary guidance for lutein: consideration for intake recommendations is scientifically supported.European journal of nutrition · 2017Pooled it
- Application of blood concentration biomarkers in nutritional epidemiology: example of carotenoid and tocopherol intake in relation to chronic disease risk.The American journal of clinical nutrition · 2019Trial
- Application of the Total Nutrient Index as a Precision Nutrition Tool to Address Dietary Recommendations Across the Life Course.Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics · 2026Article
- A Framework for Developing Intake and Use Guidance for Dietary Supplement Bioactives.Advances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.) · 2026Review
- Nutrient intake and diet quality in individuals with hyperuricemia: a matched population study.Frontiers in nutrition · 2026Article
- Article
- The Role of Cheat Meals in Dieting: A Scoping Review of Physiological and Psychological Responses.Nutrition reviews · 2025Article
- A genome-wide study on gene-nutrient interactions for hyperuricemia in a large Korean cohort (KoGES).Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Lifestyle Interventions in Frailty.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2025Review
- Genome-wide approach to study gene-nutrient intake interactions in type 2 diabetes mellitus in a large Korean cohort.Frontiers in nutrition · 2025Article
- Artificial intelligence in food and nutrition evidence: The challenges and opportunities.PNAS nexus · 2024Article
- Genome-Wide Approach of Gene-Nutrient Intake Interaction Study for Essential Hypertension in a Large Korean Cohort (KoGES).Nutrients · 2024Article
- Precision Nutrition: The Hype Is Exceeding the Science and Evidentiary Standards Needed to Inform Public Health Recommendations for Prevention of Chronic Disease.Annual review of nutrition · 2023Review
- Tolerable Upper Intake Level for Individual Amino Acids in Humans: A Narrative Review of Recent Clinical Studies.Advances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.) · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Dietary Reference Intakes (DRIs) are used in Canada and the United States in planning and assessing diets of apparently healthy individuals and population groups. The approaches used to establish DRIs on the basis of classical nutrient deficiencies and/or toxicities have worked well. However, it has proved to be more challenging to base DRI values on chronic disease endpoints; deviations from the traditional framework were often required, and in some cases, DRI values were not established for intakes that affected chronic disease outcomes despite evidence that supported a relation. The increasing proportions of elderly citizens, the growing prevalence of chronic diseases, and the persistently high prevalence of overweight and obesity, which predispose to chronic disease, highlight the importance of understanding the impact of nutrition on chronic disease prevention and control. A multidisciplinary working group sponsored by the Canadian and US government DRI steering committees met from November 2014 to April 2016 to identify options for addressing key scientific challenges encountered in the use of chronic disease endpoints to establish reference values. The working group focused on 3 key questions: 1) What are the important evidentiary challenges for selecting and using chronic disease endpoints in future DRI reviews, 2) what intake-response models can future DRI committees consider when using chronic disease endpoints, and 3) what are the arguments for and against continuing to include chronic disease endpoints in future DRI reviews? This report outlines the range of options identified by the working group for answering these key questions, as well as the strengths and weaknesses of each option.
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.