ArticleNutrition reviews2022
Governing evidence use in the nutrition policy process: evidence and lessons from the 2020 Canada food guide.
Article in Nutrition reviews, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparing the perceptions and opinions of the 2007 and 2019 Canada's food guides among parents of young children.Frontiers in public health · 2022Trial
- From Policy to Practice: A Global Analysis to Identify Factors That Influence the Implementation of Food-Based Dietary Guidelines by Health and Nutrition Professionals.Current developments in nutrition · 2026Article
- Translating nutrition science into national policy: comparative assessment of the 2025-2030 U. S. Dietary Guidelines and the Italian Mediterranean-based guidelines.Frontiers in nutrition · 2026Article
- Assessing institutional capacities to demand and use nutrition data for decision-making in Nigeria's health sector: A mixed-methods study.Health research policy and systems · 2025Article
- Article
- Enhancing Capacity for Food and Nutrient Intake Assessment in Population Sciences Research.Annual review of public health · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Nutrition guideline development is traditionally seen as a mechanism by which evidence is used to inform policy decisions. However, applying evidence in policy is a decidedly complex and politically embedded process, with no single universally agreed-upon body of evidence on which to base decisions, and multiple social concerns to address. Rather than simply calling for "evidence-based policy," an alternative is to look at the governing features of the evidence use system and reflect on what constitutes improved evidence use from a range of explicitly identified normative concerns. This study evaluated the use of evidence within the Canada Food Guide policy process by applying concepts of the "good governance of evidence" - an approach that incorporates multiple normative principles of scientific and democratic best practice to consider the structure and functioning of evidence advisory systems. The findings indicated that institutionalizing a process for evidence use grounded in democratic and scientific principles can improve evidence use in nutrition policy making.
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.