ArticleNutrients2021
Nutritional Inadequacy: Unraveling the Methodological Challenges for the Application of the Probability Approach or the EAR Cut-Point Method-A Pregnancy Perspective.
Article in Nutrients, 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, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Planetary health diet, mediterranean diet and micronutrient intake adequacy in the Seguimiento Universidad de Navarra (SUN) cohort.European journal of nutrition · 2025Article
- Monitoring for micronutrient deficiency after bariatric surgery-what is the risk?European journal of clinical nutrition · 2023Observational
- Framework of Methodology to Assess the Link between A Posteriori Dietary Patterns and Nutritional Adequacy: Application to Pregnancy.Metabolites · 2022Article
- Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of this study was to unravel the methodological challenges when exploring nutritional inadequacy, involving 608 healthy pregnant women. The usual intake of twenty-one nutrients was recorded by employing a validated FFQ. Simulated datasets of usual intake were generated, with randomly imposed uncertainty. The comparison between the usual intake and the EAR was accomplished with the probability approach and the EAR cut-point method. Point estimates were accompanied by bootstrap confidence intervals. Bootstrap intervals applied on the risk of inadequacy for raw and simulated data tended in most cases to overlap. A detailed statistical analysis, aiming to predict the level of inadequacy, as well as the application of the EAR cut-point method, along with bootstrap intervals, could effectively be used to assess nutrient inadequacy. However, the final decision for the method used depends on the distribution of nutrient-intake under evaluation. Irrespective of the applied methodology, moderate to high levels of inadequacy, calculated from FFQ were identified for certain nutrients (e.g., vitamins C, B6, magnesium, vitamin A), while the highest were recorded for folate and iron. Considering that micronutrient-poor, obesogenic diets are becoming more common, the underlying rationale may help towards unraveling the complexity characterizing nutritional inadequacies, especially in vulnerable populations.
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.