Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30904906›Full record

ReviewAnnals of nutrition & metabolism2019

Revised Reference Values for the Intake of Protein.

Margrit Richter, Kurt Baerlocher, Jürgen M Bauer, Ibrahim Elmadfa, Helmut Heseker, Eva Leschik-Bonnet, Gabriele Stangl, Dorothee Volkert, Peter Stehle, on behalf of the German Nutrition Society (DGE)

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Annals of nutrition & metabolism, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 71 papers, 9 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
71citing papers in PubMed, 9 pooled it
7.4field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

71 citing papers in PubMed, 9 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 142 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. A Systematic Review to Reassess the Formula for Early Life Growth.Advances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.) · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Protein intake and bone health: an umbrella review of systematic reviews for the evidence-based guideline of the German Nutrition Society.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2023
    Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article

11 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

10 authors at 7 institutions in 3 countries.

Margrit RichterGerman Nutrition Society, Bonn, Germany, richter@dge.de.
Kurt BaerlocherOstschweizer Kinderspital St. Gallen, St. Gallen, Switzerland.
Jürgen M BauerAgaples Bethanien Hospital, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.
Ibrahim ElmadfaDepartment of Nutrition Sciences, University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Helmut HesekerGerman Nutrition Society, Bonn, Germany.
Eva Leschik-BonnetGerman Nutrition Society, Bonn, Germany.
Gabriele StanglDepartment of Agriculture and Nutritional Sciences, University Halle-Wittenberg, Halle, Germany.
Dorothee VolkertDepartment for Biomedicine of Aging, University of Erlangen/Nürnberg, Nürnberg, Germany.
Peter StehleDepartment of Nutrition and Food Sciences, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany.
on behalf of the German Nutrition Society (DGE)
Agaplesion Bethanien Krankenhaus · DEFriedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg · DEMartin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg · DEOstschweizer Kinderspital · CHPaderborn University · DEUniversity of Bonn · DEUniversity of Vienna · AT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFollowing a timely update process, the nutrition societies of Germany, Austria, and Switzerland (D-A-CH) revised the reference values for the intake of protein in 2017. The Working Group conducted a structured literature search in PubMed considering newly published papers (2000- 2017). SUMMARY: For infants < 4 months, the estimated values were set based on the protein intake via breast milk. Reference values for infants > 4 months, children, adolescents, pregnant, and lactating women were calculated using the factorial method considering both requirement for growth and maintenance. For adults, reference values were derived from nitrogen balance studies; for seniors (> 65 years), reports on metabolic and functional parameters under various protein intakes were additionally considered. Reference -values (g protein/kg body weight per day) were set as follows: infants  < 4 months: 2.5-1.4, children: 1.3-0.8, adults < 65 years: 0.8, adults > 65 years: 1.0. Key Messages: The reference values for infants, children, adolescents, and adults < 65 years are essentially unchanged compared to recently published values. Scientifically reliable data published between 2000 and 2017 guided the D-A-CH Working Group to set a higher estimated value for adults > 65 years. Since the energy consumption continuously decreases with age, this new estimated protein intake value might be a challenge for the introduction of food-based nutrition concepts for older people.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAustriaChildChild, PreschoolDietary ProteinsFemaleGermanyHumansInfantInfant, NewbornLactationMaleMiddle AgedDietary ProteinsElderlyIndispensable amino acidsProteinProtein requirementReference value

Identifiers

PMID30904906
PMCPMC6492513
OpenAlexW2927575618

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.