Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33118099›Full record

ReviewCurrent nutrition reports2020

Comparison of Energy and Nutrient Intake vs. Estimated Needs in Warfighters: an Update.

Neil Vyas, Lynn Cialdella-Kam

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Current nutrition reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.1field-weighted citation impact, top 55% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. 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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Neil VyasDepartment of Nutrition, Case Western Reserve University, 10900 Euclid Avenue, Cleveland, OH, 44106, USA.
Lynn Cialdella-KamDepartment of Nutrition, Case Western Reserve University, 10900 Euclid Avenue, Cleveland, OH, 44106, USA. lynn.a.kam.civ@mail.mil.ORCID 0000-0001-9603-7163
Case Western Reserve University · USNaval Health Research Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Active members of the military must perform optimally under conditions of thermal stress and/or energy deficiency. Military dietary reference intakes (MDRIs) provide guidelines for energy and nutrient intakes but is based studies largely conducted in Army. Needs may vary by service branch and/or position. New protein recommendations have emerged, which are not reflected in MDRIs. PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Compare reported dietary intake in active duty members to MDRIs and 2016 American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM) sports nutrition guidelines. RECENT

findingsActive duty members are not meeting their energy and carbohydrate needs with low-to-adequate protein intake and adequate-to-high fat intake. Other nutrients of concern are vitamin D, calcium, iron, B-vitamins, and fiber. Thermal stress increases energy needs and suppresses appetite and thus increase risk for energy and nutrition deficiencies. Energy and nutrients needs can vary by branch of armed service, job responsibility, and external stressors.

Indexed as

Energy IntakeRecommended Dietary AllowancesSportsCalciumDietDietary FiberEatingHumansIronNutrientsNutritional StatusNutrition PolicyUnited StatesVitamin DVitaminsCalciumDietary FiberIronNutrientsVitamin DVitaminsCold temperatureEnergy availabilityEnergy balanceHot temperatureMilitaryOperational readiness

Identifiers

PMID33118099
OpenAlexW3095068078

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.