ArticleHealthcare (Basel, Switzerland)2023
How Well Do Low-PRAL Diets Fare in Comparison to the 2020-2025 Dietary Guidelines for Americans?
Article in Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. 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.
- Article
- Special Diets and Nutrient Intakes in Morbidly Obese US Adults in Comparison to the 2020-2025 Dietary Guidelines for Americans.Nutrition journal · 2025Article
- Diet quality in U.S. adults eating in senior and community centers: NHANES 2009-2018.The journal of nutrition, health & aging · 2024Article
- Dietary acid load decreases with age and is associated with sagittal abdominal diameter: a nationally representative quantification study in US adults.Aging clinical and experimental research · 2023Article
- Review
- Dietary Acid Load Is Not Associated with Serum Testosterone in Men: Insights from the NHANES.Nutrients · 2023Article
- Population-Level Nutritional Well-Being: Nutrition Security and Equitability.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The regular consumption of net acid-producing diets can produce "acid stress" detrimental to human health. Alkalizing diets characterized by a negative potential renal acid load (also called low-PRAL diets (LPD)) enjoy uninterrupted popularity. However, the nutritional adequacy of said diets has rarely been assessed in large populations. Using data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys, we estimated nutrient intake in individuals consuming an LPD and contrasted the results in an age- and sex-specific manner to individuals on an acidifying diet (high-PRAL diet, HPD). Both groups were compared with the daily nutritional goals (DNG) specified in the 2020-2025 Dietary Guidelines for Americans (DGA). Our analysis included 29,683 individuals, including 7234 participants on an LPD and 22,449 participants on an HPD. Individuals on an LPD numerically met more nutritional goals than individuals on an HPD, yet both failed to meet the goals for several nutrients of public health concern (vitamin D and calcium). As opposed to individuals on an HPD, LPD consumers met the DGA recommendations for saturated fat and potassium. Individuals on an LPD consumed significantly more fiber than individuals on an HPD, as well as yielded a more favorable potassium-to-sodium intake ratio.
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.