ArticleCurrent developments in nutrition2018
An Evidence Map of Research Linking Dietary Sugars to Potentially Related Health Outcomes.
Article in Current developments in nutrition, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Several methods for assessing research waste in reviews with a systematic search: a scoping review.PeerJ · 2024Article
- Exploring Cross-Sectoral Implications of the Sustainable Development Goals: Towards a Framework for Integrating Health Equity Perspectives With the Land-Water-Energy Nexus.Public health reviews · 2022Review
- Assessment of Food Quality in School Canteens: A Comparative Quantitative Study between Primary and Secondary Schools in Malaysia.Nutrients · 2021Article
- Associations of Intake of Free and Naturally Occurring Sugars from Solid Foods and Drinks with Cardiometabolic Risk Factors in a Quebec Adult Population: The PREDISE (PRÉDicteurs Individuels, Sociaux et Environnementaux) Study.The Journal of nutrition · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEvidence mapping is an emerging tool used to systematically identify, organize, and summarize the quantity, distribution, and characteristics of published studies with the goal of identifying knowledge gaps and future research needs.
objectiveThe aim of the study was to present an evidence-map database of all published studies that investigated dietary sugars and to select health outcomes for explicating research trends and gaps.
methodsTo update an evidence-map database previously published in 2013, we performed a literature search in MEDLINE to identify English-language, peer-reviewed human intervention and prospective cohort studies published from January 2013 to December 2016. Abstracts and full-text articles were dual screened on the basis of predefined eligibility criteria. We classified outcomes into 7 health outcome categories that are potentially affected by dietary sugar. Data from the updated evidence-map database were merged with those from the previous database for analysis and charting.
resultsThere were 918 sugar and control intervention arms from a total of 298 intervention studies from 1966 to December 2016. A variety of sugar interventions were investigated across the included intervention studies, and it appears that the research interest across all outcome categories (cardiovascular disease risks, diabetes risks, body weight, body composition, appetite, dietary intake, and liver health-related outcomes) sharply increased from 2006. Bubble plots showed research gaps in long-term intervention studies and in intervention studies in patients with diabetes. In contrast, all 25 included cohort studies had long-term follow-up durations and much larger sample sizes than did intervention studies. None of the cohort studies evaluated dietary intake outcomes, and only one cohort study each examined appetite- and liver health-related outcomes.
conclusionsThe research trends and research gaps have not changed since 2013 when the original evidence-map database was updated. With continuous updating, evidence mapping can facilitate the process of knowledge translation and possibly reduce research waste.
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.