ArticleAdvances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.)2016
Perspective: NutriGrade: A Scoring System to Assess and Judge the Meta-Evidence of Randomized Controlled Trials and Cohort Studies in Nutrition Research.
Article in Advances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.), 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 164 papers, 88 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
164 citing papers in PubMed, 88 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Pooled it
- The effect of Pemafibrate on glucose metabolism and FGF21: a systematic review and meta-analysisa of randomized controlled trials.European journal of clinical pharmacology · 2026Pooled it
- The effect of Lippia Citriodora (LC) extract on cardiometabolic risk factors: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Nutrition & diabetes · 2026Pooled it
- Probiotic Supplementation and Bone Health Parameters in Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2026Pooled it
- Body mass index and cancer survival: a meta-analysis of cohort studies.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2025Pooled it
- Effect of egg consumption on circulating choline, betaine, and trimethylamine n-oxide in adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Nutrition journal · 2025Pooled it
- Nordic diet and chronic disease: a GRADE-assessed systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective cohorts and randomized controlled trials.European journal of nutrition · 2025Pooled it
- Protein intake and cardiovascular diseases: an umbrella review of systematic reviews for the evidence-based guideline on protein intake of the German Nutrition Society.European journal of nutrition · 2025Pooled it
- Effects of Xylitol-laced Sweets on the Accumulation of Dental Plaque : A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.International dental journal · 2025Pooled it
- Umbrella Review of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses on Consumption of Different Food Groups and Risk of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus and Metabolic Syndrome.The Journal of nutrition · 2025Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Meal replacements on obesity and leptin: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Reviews in endocrine & metabolic disorders · 2025Pooled it
- Coffee and tea consumption and cardiovascular disease and all-cause and cause-specific mortality in individuals with diabetes mellitus: a meta-analysis of prospective observational studies.Frontiers in nutrition · 2025Pooled it
- The effect of ketogenic diet on adipokines levels: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized-controlled trials.Acta diabetologica · 2024Pooled it
- Dose-Response Associations Between Diet and Risk of Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Meta-Analysis of Prospective Cohort Studies.Nutrients · 2024Pooled it
- Protein intake and cancer: an umbrella review of systematic reviews for the evidence-based guideline of the German Nutrition Society.European journal of nutrition · 2024Pooled it
- Artificially sweetened beverage consumption and all-cause and cause-specific mortality: an updated systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies.Nutrition journal · 2024Pooled it
- Dietary protein and blood pressure: an umbrella review of systematic reviews and evaluation of the evidence.European journal of nutrition · 2024Pooled it
- Improving sarcopenia in older adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of whey protein supplementation with or without resistance training.The journal of nutrition, health & aging · 2024Pooled it
- Effect of metformin on anti-mullerian hormone levels in women with polycystic ovarian syndrome: a systematic review and meta-regression analysis of randomized controlled trials with.BMC endocrine disorders · 2024Pooled it
104 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The objective of this study was to develop a scoring system (NutriGrade) to evaluate the quality of evidence of randomized controlled trial (RCT) and cohort study meta-analyses in nutrition research, building upon previous tools and expert recommendations. NutriGrade aims to assess the meta-evidence of an association or effect between different nutrition factors and outcomes, taking into account nutrition research-specific requirements not considered by other tools. In a pretest study, 6 randomly selected meta-analyses investigating diet-disease relations were evaluated with NutriGrade by 5 independent raters. After revision, NutriGrade was applied by the same raters to 30 randomly selected meta-analyses in the same thematic area. The reliability of ratings of NutriGrade items was calculated with the use of a multirater κ, and reliability of the total (summed scores) was calculated with the use of intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs). The following categories for meta-evidence evaluation were established: high (8-10), moderate (6-7.99), low (4-5.99), and very low (0-3.99). The NutriGrade scoring system (maximum of 10 points) comprises the following items: 1) risk of bias, study quality, and study limitations, 2) precision, 3) heterogeneity, 4) directness, 5) publication bias, 6) funding bias, 7) study design, 8) effect size, and 9) dose-response. The NutriGrade score varied between 2.9 (very low meta-evidence) and 8.8 (high meta-evidence) for meta-analyses of RCTs, and it ranged between 3.1 and 8.8 for meta-analyses of cohort studies. The κ value of the ratings for each scoring item varied from 0.32 (95% CI: 0.22, 0.42) for risk of bias for cohort studies and 0.95 (95% CI: 0.91, 0.99) for study design, with a mean κ of 0.66 (95% CI: 0.53, 0.79). The ICC of the total score was 0.81 (95% CI: 0.69, 0.90). The NutriGrade scoring system showed good agreement and reliability. The initial findings regarding the performance of this newly established scoring system need further evaluation in independent analyses.
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.