ReviewPublic health nutrition2017
Study sponsorship and the nutrition research agenda: analysis of randomized controlled trials included in systematic reviews of nutrition interventions to address obesity.
Review in Public health nutrition, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Pooled it
- A framework for assessing the trustworthiness of scientific research findings.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026Article
- Cannabis companies and the sponsorship of scientific research: A cross-sectional Canadian case study.PloS one · 2023Article
- The Application of Systems Science in Nutrition-Related Behaviors and Outcomes Implementation Research: A Scoping Review.Current developments in nutrition · 2021Article
- Corporate political activity in the context of unhealthy food advertising restrictions across Transport for London: A qualitative case study.PLoS medicine · 2021Article
- Commercial use of evidence in public health policy: a critical assessment of food industry submissions to global-level consultations on non-communicable disease prevention.BMJ global health · 2021Article
- Ultra-processed foods and the corporate capture of nutrition-an essay by Gyorgy Scrinis.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2020Article
- Perspective: The Evidence-Based Framework in Nutrition and Dietetics: Implementation, Challenges, and Future Directions.Advances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.) · 2019Review
- Food industry sponsorship of academic research: investigating commercial bias in the research agenda.Public health nutrition · 2018Article
- The Influence of Industry Sponsorship on the Research Agenda: A Scoping Review.American journal of public health · 2018Article
- Scientific rigor and credibility in the nutrition research landscape.The American journal of clinical nutrition · 2018Article
- Tobacco papers and tobacco industry ties in regulatory toxicology and pharmacology.Journal of public health policy · 2018Article
- Study sponsorship and the nutrition research agenda: analysis of cohort studies examining the association between nutrition and obesity.Public health nutrition · 2017Article
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
objectiveTo categorize the research topics covered by a sample of randomized controlled trials (RCT) included in systematic reviews of nutrition interventions to address obesity; to describe their funding sources; and to explore the association between funding sources and nutrition research topics.
designCross-sectional study. SUBJECTS: RCT included in Cochrane Reviews of nutrition interventions to address obesity and/or overweight.
resultsTwo hundred and thirteen RCT from seventeen Cochrane Reviews were included. Funding source and authors' conflicts of interest were disclosed in 82·6 and 29·6 % of the studies, respectively. RCT were more likely to test an intervention to manipulate nutrients in the context of reduced energy intake (44·2 % of studies) than food-level (11·3 %) and dietary pattern-level (0·9 %) interventions. Most of the food industry-sponsored studies focused on interventions involving manipulations of specific nutrients (66·7 %). Only 33·1 % of the industry-funded studies addressed dietary behaviours compared with 66·9 % of the non-industry-funded ones (P=0·002). The level of food processing was poorly considered across all funding sources.
conclusionsThe predominance of RCT examining nutrient-specific questions could limit the public health relevance of rigorous evidence available for systematic reviews and dietary guidelines.
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.