Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30142191›Full record

ArticlePloS one2018

Meal and habitual dietary networks identified through Semiparametric Gaussian Copula Graphical Models in a German adult population.

Carolina Schwedhelm, Sven Knüppel, Lukas Schwingshackl, Heiner Boeing, Khalid Iqbal

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
4.4field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed, 33 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Advances in methods for characterizing dietary patterns: A scoping review.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2024
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Using food network analysis to understand meal patterns in pregnant women with high and low diet quality.The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity · 2021
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Carolina SchwedhelmDepartment of Epidemiology, German Institute of Human Nutrition Potsdam-Rehbruecke (DIfE), Nuthetal, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-7617-6641
Sven KnüppelDepartment of Epidemiology, German Institute of Human Nutrition Potsdam-Rehbruecke (DIfE), Nuthetal, Germany.
Lukas SchwingshacklDepartment of Epidemiology, German Institute of Human Nutrition Potsdam-Rehbruecke (DIfE), Nuthetal, Germany.
Heiner BoeingDepartment of Epidemiology, German Institute of Human Nutrition Potsdam-Rehbruecke (DIfE), Nuthetal, Germany.
Khalid IqbalDepartment of Epidemiology, German Institute of Human Nutrition Potsdam-Rehbruecke (DIfE), Nuthetal, Germany.
German Institute of Human Nutrition · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Gaussian graphical models (GGMs) are exploratory methods that can be applied to construct networks of food intake. Such networks were constructed for meal-structured data, elucidating how foods are consumed in relation to each other at meal level. Meal-specific networks were compared with habitual dietary networks using data from an EPIC-Potsdam sub-cohort study. Three 24-hour dietary recalls were collected cross-sectionally from 815 adults in 2010-2012. Food intake was averaged to obtain the habitual intake. GGMs were applied to four main meals and habitual intakes of 39 food groups to generate meal-specific and habitual dietary networks, respectively. Communities and centrality were detected in the dietary networks to facilitate interpretation. The breakfast network revealed five communities of food groups with other vegetables, sauces, bread, margarine, and sugar & confectionery as central food groups. The lunch and afternoon snacks networks showed higher variability in food consumption and six communities were detected in each of these meal networks. Among the central food groups detected in both of these meal networks were potatoes, red meat, other vegetables, and bread. Two dinner networks were identified with five communities and other vegetables as a central food group. Partial correlations at meals were stronger than on the habitual level. The meal-specific dietary networks were only partly reflected in the habitual dietary network with a decreasing percentage: 64.3% for dinner, 50.0% for breakfast, 36.2% for lunch, and 33.3% for afternoon snack. The method of GGM yielded dietary networks that describe combinations of foods at the respective meals. Analysing food consumption on the habitual level did not exactly reflect meal level intake. Therefore, interpretation of habitual networks should be done carefully. Meal networks can help understand dietary habits, however, GGMs warrant validation in other populations.

Indexed as

HabitsMealsModels, StatisticalAdultAgedDietEatingFemaleGermanyHumansMaleNormal DistributionNutrition SurveysSnacks

Identifiers

PMID30142191
PMCPMC6108519
OpenAlexW2888078923

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.