ReviewNutrients2022
Christmas and New Year "Dietary Titbits" and Perspectives from Chronobiology.
Review in Nutrients, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Circadian Clock and Nutrition.Nutrients · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A historical Christmas card connecting two pioneers of modern chronobiology (Colin Pittendrigh and Jürgen Aschoff) brings together key evolutionary facets of the field at Christmas time. The importance of the field to physiology and medicine is conveyed by the Nobel Prize award in 2017 for discoveries of how body clocks facilitate the temporal organization of physiology across days and nights. Temporal organization can have relevance for dietary Christmas excesses and dietary New Year resolutions. Herein, we examine how diet around Christmas and New Year has been targeted in human health research and we examine published opinion on dietary practice concerning Christmas and New Year using a systematized literature review approach. Thereafter, via a selective literature synthesis regarding time-restricted eating, we explore the chronobiological notion that "when" we eat and drink may make differences in terms of whether we experience weight gain and adverse health effects during and after the festive days. Overall, current Christmas eating is typically detrimental to health in terms of "how much" we consume of "what". Regarding New Year's goal-setting, chronobiology-based advice could be considered insofar as "when" we eat may be a healthier and more sustainable nutritional habit alternative. While we need further studies in humans, individual and public health may benefit during and after Christmas by adhering to plausible principles of chrononutrition. That detrimental nutritional excesses over Christmas may encourage individuals to tackle their eating habits should not be left untapped.
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.