Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30649173›Full record

ReviewAdvances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.)2019

Perspective: The Evidence-Based Framework in Nutrition and Dietetics: Implementation, Challenges, and Future Directions.

Elizabeth P Neale, Linda C Tapsell

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Advances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Application of the Knowledge-to-Action framework in translating nutrition and dietetic knowledge into practice: A systematic review.Nutrition in clinical practice : official publication of the American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Use of the i-PARIHS framework in nutrition and dietetics research and practice: A citation analysis of the literature and case studies.Nutrition in clinical practice : official publication of the American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition · 2025
    Review
  7. Review
  8. Role of Fruit-Derived Antioxidants in Fighting Cancer: A Narrative Review.Indian journal of clinical biochemistry : IJCB · 2025
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Undertaking a research project improves confidence in research skills among student dietitians.Journal of human nutrition and dietetics : the official journal of the British Dietetic Association · 2022
    Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. 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

2 authors.

Elizabeth P NealeSchool of Medicine, Faculty of Science, Medicine and Health, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, New South Wales, Australia.
Linda C TapsellSchool of Medicine, Faculty of Science, Medicine and Health, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, New South Wales, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Decision making in nutrition is based on current available scientific evidence. However, we are currently living in a time of highly accessible information, and with the increase in accessibility has come a concomitant increase in misinformation and pseudoscience relating to nutrition. This presents a challenge to the nutrition research community, practitioners, and consumers, and highlights a need to critically examine the current evidence-based framework in nutrition, and identify strategies for future improvements. This narrative review outlines the current evidence-based framework and approaches to evidence-based practice in the nutrition field, focusing on policy and guideline development. Within the framework, systematic reviews are an important tool for evidence-based practice, underpinning translation guidelines and other implementation documents. Recommendations for consumption of nutrients, foods, and whole diets are required to guide consumers and practitioners; however, these resources must be updated regularly to remain timely and accurate. In turn, clinical practice guidelines guide practitioners in how to implement the evidence base for patients and clients, supporting practitioners to be positioned as a key conduit between scientific evidence and the public. In contrast, health claims may support marketing of food products, but require consideration of the strength and quality of the evidence to support health claims, with external oversight required to ensure claims are appropriate. Collecting, synthesizing, and translating the evidence base in nutrition remains an ongoing challenge, particularly in the current context of increased information availability. To address growing challenges in combating pseudoscience, nutrition researchers, policy makers, and practitioners must work together, and the role of practitioners in translating the evidence base and personalizing it to individual patients must be emphasized. Continuing to address current challenges, including increasing the timeliness and consistency of the approach to the evidence base, is required to ensure informed and robust nutrition policy, research, and practice into the future.

Indexed as

DieteticsEvidence-Based PracticeForecastingHumansNutrition Policy

Identifiers

PMID30649173
PMCPMC6370257

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.