Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32504536›Full record

ArticleAdvances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.)2020

Perspective: Towards Automated Tracking of Content and Evidence Appraisal of Nutrition Research.

Chen Yang, Dana Hawwash, Bernard De Baets, Jildau Bouwman, Carl Lachat

Abstract 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. Cited by 1 paper.

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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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.

Chen YangDepartment of Food Technology, Safety and Health, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.
Dana HawwashDepartment of Food Technology, Safety and Health, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.
Bernard De BaetsKERMIT (Research Unit of Knowledge-based Systems), Department of Data Analysis and Mathematical Modelling, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.
Jildau BouwmanNetherlands Organization for Applied Scientific Research, Zeist, The Netherlands.
Carl LachatDepartment of Food Technology, Safety and Health, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Robust recommendations for healthy diets and nutrition require careful synthesis of available evidence. Given the increasing volume of research articles generated, the retrieval and synthesis of evidence are increasingly becoming laborious and time-consuming. Information technology could help to reduce workload for humans. To guide supervised learning however, human identification of key study characteristics is necessary. Reporting guidelines recommend that authors include essential content in articles and could generate manually labeled training data for automated evidence retrieval and synthesis. Here, we present a semiautomated approach to annotate, link, and track the content of nutrition research manuscripts. We used the STROBE extension for nutritional epidemiology (STROBE-nut) reporting guidelines to manually annotate a sample of 15 articles and converted the semantic information into linked data in a Neo4j graph database through an automated process. Six summary statistics were computed to estimate the reporting completeness of the articles. The content structure, presence of essential study characteristics as well as the reporting completeness of the articles are visualized automatically from the graph database. The archived linked data are interoperable through their annotations and relations. A graph database with linked data on essential study characteristics can enable Natural Language Processing in nutrition.

Indexed as

Databases, FactualDietHumansNutritional Statusgraph databaseontologyreporting guidelinesresearch semanticsstandardizationSTROBE-nut

Identifiers

PMID32504536
PMCPMC7490154

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.