ReviewBundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz2021
[Cornerstones of evidence-based health information].
Review in Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Evaluating online nutrition information: a scoping review of young adults' source preferences and criteria for credibility and trustworthiness.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Evidence-based health information is intended to empower people to make informed health decisions and include their personal goals and expectations by providing them with neutral and understandable content. To achieve this, a number of requirements must be followed in the production of health information, which are described in this article. These include, among other things, systematic research, a reasoned selection of appropriate evidence, and consideration of current evidence to communicate numbers, risks, and probabilities. Implementation must also take into account the issues, competencies and usage patterns of the groups for which the information is intended. A number of German-language information services demonstrate that implementation of these requirements is feasible for the general public.
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.