ArticleFrontiers in nutrition2022
Comparison of the Index of Nutritional Quality in Breast Cancer Patients With Healthy Women.
Article in Frontiers in nutrition, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Disproportionality Analysis of Breast Cancer-Related Reports Across Vitamin K Homologs in the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Association of serum melatonin with dietary patterns and dietary nutrients in chinese population: a cross-sectional study.European journal of nutrition · 2025Article
- Preliminary Insights into Quality of Life and Dietary Intake in Patients with Breast Cancer on Adjuvant Endocrine Therapy.Cancers · 2025Article
- Article
- Nutritional Metabolomics in Diet-Breast Cancer Relations: Current Research, Challenges, and Future Directions-A Review.Biomedicines · 2023Review
- Role of Vitamin K in Selected Malignant Neoplasms in Women.Nutrients · 2022Review
- The Association Between Fasting Blood Sugar and Index of Nutritional Quality in Adult Women.Frontiers in nutrition · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The index of nutritional quality (INQ) is derived from the food frequency questionnaire (FFQ) and is a method of quantitative and qualitative analysis of diet. This study aimed to compare the INQ for different dietary components between breast cancer (BC) patients and healthy control. Methods: This case-control study was performed on 180 women with BC and 360 healthy women. Data on general characteristics, medical history, anthropometric indices, physical activity, alcohol consumption, reproductive history, smoking, and dietary intake were collected. A valid FFQ was used to assess the intake of nutrients and the INQ was calculated based on the daily intake of the nutrients. Results: There was a significant association between BC and INQ of vitamin A (OR = 0.07, 0.01-0.29), vitamin E (OR = 0.43, 0.20-0.93), vitamin B6 (OR = 0.003, 0.000-0.021), riboflavin (OR = 0.25, 0.11-0.59), vitamin K (OR = 0.58, 0.37-0.90), biotin (OR = 0.07, 0.02-0.26), vitamin B12 (OR = 0.32, 0.18-0.56), vitamin C (OR = 0.72, 0.55-0.95), zinc (OR = 0.020, 0.005-0.083), calcium (OR = 0.14, 0.04-0.54) and magnesium (OR = 0.003, 0.000-0.024). Further adjustment for BMI disappeared the association between INQ of vitamin C and BC. The results did not change after further adjustments for waist circumstance and total calorie intake. Conclusion: A significant association was observed between BC and the INQ of vitamin A, vitamin E, vitamin B6, riboflavin, vitamin K, biotin, vitamin B12, vitamin C, zinc, calcium, and magnesium. The INQ can be used as an indicator in assessing clinical nutrition-related problems. Future longitudinal studies are needed to confirm these results.
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.