Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32379857›Full record

ArticleAdvances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.)2020

Why the Derivation of Nutrient Reference Values Should be Harmonized and How It Can be Accomplished.

Ann L Yaktine, Janet C King, Lindsay H Allen

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Advances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Ann L YaktineThe National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, Washington, DC, USA.
Janet C KingUniversity of California at Berkeley and Davis, Berkeley, CA, USA.
Lindsay H AllenUSDA, Davis, CA, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The adoption of a panel of Nutrient Reference Values (NRVs) in place of a single recommended intake allowed for assessment of nutritional adequacy and safe upper intake levels for nutrients on a population level and for individuals. The Average Requirement (AR) and Tolerable Upper Intake Level (UL) comprise 2 core NRVs needed to obtain accurate, comparable estimates of population-level nutrient intakes, which are necessary to plan and evaluate nutrition support programs globally. Harmonizing the derivation of NRVs, particularly the AR and UL, is essential to ensure inclusion of all countries, whether high-, middle-, or low-income, in the process and to improve access for all users to the tools and data needed to carry it out. The NRV process today is more rigorous and transparent than the first derivation of DRIs because of adoption of systematic reviews and bias assessment methodologies, updated food and nutrient databases, data on cultural and context-specific dietary patterns, and better metabolic markers of nutritional status. A proposed framework for the derivation of NRVs builds on available methodologies to support the NRV process; however, this is not sufficient to achieve harmonization of the process. Fundamental to moving forward toward harmonization is removing existing barriers, including limited access to resources and databases and variance in terminology used to identify specific NRVs; adoption of more rigorous and transparent methodologies, including chronic disease endpoints, in the review process; and creating a central repository for easily accessible evidence. Chief among the barriers to harmonization is a willingness of global bodies to support an agreed-upon approach to the derivation process. Improving access to tools and data resources and providing guidance and support to encourage their adoption are critical to achieving harmonization of the NRV process. The factorial approach for calculating a nutrient requirement is described as the sum of total endogenous nutrient loss (endogenous fecal, urinary, integumental, seminal, menstrual) divided by its bioavailability or fractional absorption.

Indexed as

NutrientsNutritional StatusHumansNutritional RequirementsNutrition PolicyRecommended Dietary AllowancesReference ValuesNutrientsAverage RequirementDietary Reference IntakesharmonizationNutrient Reference ValuesTolerable Upper Intake Level

Identifiers

PMID32379857
PMCPMC7490149

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.