ReviewNutrition reviews2018
An analysis of methods used to synthesize evidence and grade recommendations in food-based dietary guidelines.
Review in Nutrition reviews, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers, 3 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
34 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Assessment of the Methods Used to Develop Vitamin D and Calcium Recommendations-A Systematic Review of Bone Health Guidelines.Nutrients · 2021Pooled it
- Hierarchies of evidence applied to lifestyle Medicine (HEALM): introduction of a strength-of-evidence approach based on a methodological systematic review.BMC medical research methodology · 2019Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Adherence to dietary guidelines for the Spanish population and risk of overweight/obesity in the SUN cohort.PloS one · 2019Trial
- Current Guidelines on Dietary Protein Intake for Patients with Diabetic Kidney Disease: A Scoping Review.Current developments in nutrition · 2025Review
- Assessing the Alignment of Chilean Food-Based Dietary Guidelines on Cancer Prevention: A Content Analysis.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- A comparison of development methods used to define portion sizes in food-based dietary guidelines around the world.Frontiers in nutrition · 2025Article
- Protocol: The effects of nutrient- vs food- vs food-substitution-based dietary recommendations for reducing free sugar intakes, on free sugar intakes, dietary profiles and sweet taste outcomes: A randomised controlled trial.Nutrition and health · 2024Article
- A global analysis of portion size recommendations in food-based dietary guidelines.Frontiers in nutrition · 2024Article
- Assessment of the knowledge, attitude, and practice of childbearing mothers in the geographically coastal region of Bangladesh for cleanliness and food safety of food security.SAGE open medicine · 2024Article
- An audit of the dissemination strategies and plan included in international food-based dietary guidelines.Public health nutrition · 2023Article
- Article
- Article
- Food-based dietary guidelines in Spain: an assessment of their methodological quality.European journal of clinical nutrition · 2022Review
- Governing evidence use in the nutrition policy process: evidence and lessons from the 2020 Canada food guide.Nutrition reviews · 2022Article
- Health Related Values and Preferences Regarding Meat Intake: A Cross-Sectional Mixed-Methods Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- Evidence Use in the Development of the Australian Dietary Guidelines: A Qualitative Study.Nutrients · 2021Article
- Values and Preferences Related to Cancer Risk among Red and Processed Meat Eaters: A Pilot Cross-Sectional Study with Semi-Structured Interviews.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Perspective: Modeling Healthy Eating Patterns for Food-Based Dietary Guidelines-Scientific Concepts, Methodological Processes, Limitations, and Lessons.Advances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.) · 2021Article
- Comparison of methodological quality between the 2007 and 2019 Canadian dietary guidelines.Public health nutrition · 2020Article
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
Evidence-informed guideline development methods underpinned by systematic reviews ensure that guidelines are transparently developed, free from overt bias, and based on the best available evidence. Only recently has the nutrition field begun using these methods to develop public health nutrition guidelines. Given the importance of following an evidence-informed approach and recent advances in related methods, this study sought to describe the methods used to synthesize evidence, rate evidence quality, grade recommendations, and manage conflicts of interest (COIs) in national food-based dietary guidelines (FBDGs). The Food and Agriculture Organization's FBDGs database was searched to identify the latest versions of FBDGs published from 2010 onward. Relevant data from 32 FBDGs were extracted, and the findings are presented narratively. This study shows that despite advances in evidence-informed methods for developing dietary guidelines, there are variations and deficiencies in methods used to review evidence, rate evidence quality, and grade recommendations. Dietary guidelines should follow systematic and transparent methods and be informed by the best available evidence, while considering important contextual factors and managing conflicts of interest.
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.