Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34836086›Full record

ArticleNutrients2021

Do Older Women of Reproductive Age Have Better Diet Quality than Younger Women of Reproductive Age?

Nahal Habibi, Katherine M Livingstone, Suzanne Edwards, Jessica A Grieger

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Nutrients, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

4 authors.

Nahal HabibiRobinson Research Institute, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA 5005, Australia.
Katherine M LivingstoneInstitute for Physical Activity and Nutrition, School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Deakin University, Geelong, VIC 3220, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-9682-7541
Suzanne EdwardsAdelaide Health Technology Assessment (AHTA), University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA 5005, Australia.
Jessica A GriegerRobinson Research Institute, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA 5005, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-1515-948X

Funding

National Health and Medical Research Council APP1173803National Health and Medical Research Council APP2000905
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There is increasing recognition of the importance of nutrition for reproductive health, but little is known regarding the diet quality of younger vs. older reproductive aged women, and how their intakes relate to dietary recommendations. The purpose of the study was to examine the diets of younger (19-35 years old) compared to older (35-50 years old) reproductive aged women, and how they align with dietary recommendations. Women aged 19-50 years from the 2011-13 Australian National Nutrition and Physical Activity Survey were included (

Indexed as

Age FactorsAdultAustraliaDiet, HealthyEatingFeeding BehaviorFemaleHealth SurveysHumansMiddle AgedNutritional StatusNutrition PolicyReproductive HealthYoung AdultAustraliadietary guideline indexdietary guidelinesdietary intakenutrientsnutrition surveyreproductive agewomen

Identifiers

PMID34836086
PMCPMC8625416

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.