ArticlePublic health nutrition2021
Knowledge, opinions and expectations of adults concerning personalised genotype-based dietary recommendations: a German survey.
Article in Public health nutrition, 2021. 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.
- Acceptability, consideration, intention, and uptake of six common types of direct-to-consumer genetic tests in the Netherlands.Journal of genetic counseling · 2025Article
- Data in Personalized Nutrition: Bridging Biomedical, Psycho-behavioral, and Food Environment Approaches for Population-wide Impact.Advances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.) · 2025Review
- Factors influencing the intention of young adults to adopt genotype-based personalised advice on diet and physical activity according to perceived weight status.Journal of nutritional science · 2024Article
- Attitudes towards personalised nutrition recommendations in health apps: Results of a cross-sectional online survey.Digital healthArticle
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo assess the knowledge, opinions and expectations of persons with and without obesity concerning personalised genotype-based nutrition.
designQuestions about nutrition, weight management and personalised genotype-based dietary recommendations were asked via standardised telephone-based interviews. Sociodemographic and anthropometric data were collected. The data were statistically weighted by age, gender, education, domicile and BMI.
settingGermany.
participantsRepresentative sample of the German population (n 1003) randomly sampled via a scientific Random Digit dial method plus 354 adults with a BMI ≥ 30·0 kg/m2 to enlarge the sample.
resultsData of 1357 participants were analysed (51·1 % female, age: 50·5 ± 18·5 years, 15·9 % adults with a BMI ≥ 30·0 kg/m2). About 42 % or 19 % of the survey participants stated to know the terms personalised dietary recommendation or genotype-based dietary recommendation, respectively. Of those, 15·8 % indicated to have an experience with a personalised or genotype-based dietary recommendation. Almost 70 % of the survey participants believed that a genotype-based dietary recommendation is a reasonable measure for weight management. About 55 % of the survey participants pointed out that a genotype-based dietary recommendation is an effective concept in general. One-third of the survey participants (34·6 %) indicated to conceive the usage of a genotype-based dietary recommendation.
conclusionMost of the survey participants did not know the term personalised or genotype-based dietary recommendation. One-third of the study participants are interested to use a genotype-based dietary recommendation. Therefore, more education of the public is necessary to properly help people making informed and serious decisions and assessing commercially available direct-to-consumer genetic tests.
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.