ArticleAppetite2018
Methodological and reporting quality in laboratory studies of human eating behavior.
Article in Appetite, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Downsizing food: a systematic review and meta-analysis examining the effect of reducing served food portion sizes on daily energy intake and body weight.The British journal of nutrition · 2023Pooled it
- Calorie reformulation: a systematic review and meta-analysis examining the effect of manipulating food energy density on daily energy intake.The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity · 2022Pooled it
- Priming food intake with weight control cues: systematic review with a meta-analysis.The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity · 2018Pooled it
- Eating rate has sustained effects on energy intake from ultraprocessed diets: a 2-week ad libitum dietary randomized controlled crossover trial.The American journal of clinical nutrition · 2026Trial
- Validation of a Mobile App-Based Visual Analog Scale for Appetite Measurement in the Real World: A Randomized Digital Clinical Trial.Nutrients · 2023Trial
- The role of memory ability, depth and mode of recall in the impact of memory on later consumption.Appetite · 2020Trial
- Reductions to main meal portion sizes reduce daily energy intake regardless of perceived normality of portion size: a 5 day cross-over laboratory experiment.The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity · 2020Trial
- Child and adult snack food intake in response to manipulated pre-packaged snack item quantity/variety and snack box size: a population-based randomized trial.International journal of obesity (2005) · 2019Trial
- A smartphone based attentive eating intervention for energy intake and weight loss: results from a randomised controlled trial.BMC public health · 2019Trial
- Trial
- Patient advocacy group perspectives on treatment priorities and clinical trials for the rare neurodevelopmental condition, Prader-Willi syndrome.Orphanet journal of rare diseases · 2026Article
- Association Between Self-Reported Dietary Intake Questionnaires and Objective Measures in an Inpatient Cross-Sectional Study.Nutrients · 2026Article
- Olfactory and Gustatory Supra-Threshold Sensitivities Are Linked toFoods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Incidental exposure to hedonic and healthy food features affects food preferences one day later.Cognitive research: principles and implications · 2021Article
- High/low cortisol reactivity and food intake in people with obesity and healthy weight.Translational psychiatry · 2020Article
- When a portion becomes a norm: Exposure to a smaller vs. larger portion of food affects later food intake.Food quality and preference · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Reprinted as
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The methodological quality and reporting practices of laboratory studies of human eating behavior determine the validity and replicability of nutrition science. The aim of this research was to examine basic methodology and reporting practices in recent representative laboratory studies of human eating behavior. We examined laboratory studies of human eating behavior (N = 140 studies) published during 2016. Basic methodology (e.g., sample size, use of participant blinding) and reporting practices (e.g., information on participant characteristics) were assessed for each study. Some information relating to participant characteristics (e.g., age, gender) and study methodology (e.g., length of washout periods in within-subjects studies) were reported in the majority of studies. However, other aspects of study reporting, including participant eligibility criteria and how sample size was determined were frequently not reported. Studies often did not appear to standardize pre-test meal appetite or attempt to blind participants to study aims. The average sample size of studies was small (between-subjects design studies in particular) and the primary statistical analyses in a number of studies (24%) were reliant on very small sample sizes that would be likely to produce unreliable results. There are basic methodology and reporting practices in the laboratory study of human eating behavior that are sub-optimal and this is likely to be affecting the validity and replicability of research. Recommendations to address these issues are discussed.
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.