ArticlePublic health nutrition2024
Development and application of a 2-step methodology to select a reference society providing Dietary Reference Values for national implementation.
Article in Public health nutrition, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo describe and discuss a 2-step methodology developed to select a reference society that provides Dietary Reference Values (DRV) for national implementation and to illustrate its application in Switzerland with one macronutrient and one micronutrient.
designDuring Step 1, we searched and compared DRV and methodologies used to define DRV from eight European societies for seven selected nutrients. We repeated this procedure during Step 2 for DRV from two preselected societies for forty-four nutrients.
settingThe 2-step methodology applied here for Switzerland may be used in other countries.
participantsThe research team commissioned six external experts from three linguistic regions of Switzerland, who provided their opinions through two online surveys, individual interviews and a focus group.
resultsAfter Step 1, we excluded five societies because of old publication dates, irrelevant publication languages for Switzerland, difficulty in accessing documents, or because their DRV were mainly based on another society. After Step 2, the two societies were qualified based on the analysis of the values and methodologies used. The need for free and easily accessible scientific background information favoured the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA). We chose alternative societies for nine nutrients for the overall population or subgroups and for the elderly.
conclusionsTo manage heterogeneous and complex data from several societies, adopting a 2-step methodology including fewer nutrients and more societies during Step 1, and fewer societies but all nutrients in Step 2, was very helpful. With some exceptions, we selected EFSA as the main society to provide DRV for Switzerland.
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.