ArticleEuropean journal of nutrition2024
Moderate low-cost modifications in diet prevent a substantial number of deaths and mitigate environmental impacts in Brazil.
Article in European journal of nutrition, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- The environmental impact of diet in Latin American populations: a systematic review with meta-analysis.Public health nutrition · 2026Pooled it
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 at 2 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThis study aimed to estimate the health, economic, and environmental impacts of moderate simulated interventions on dietary intake in Brazil.
methodsData on food price and consumption were obtained from three nationwide surveys. Baseline dietary intake was estimated for 33,859 individuals aged 25 years and older. Counterfactual intakes were based on six hypothetical intervention scenarios, by changing the weekly frequency and serving size in low or high consumers of fruit and vegetables (FV), milk, whole grains, red and processed meats, and sugar-sweetened beverages. For each scenario, we estimated the attributable number of deaths and disability-adjusted life years (DALY), monetary cost, environmental impacts (14 midpoint indicators), and environmentally-mediated health impacts.
resultsCompared with the baseline intake and cost, the most expensive intervention (+ 8.3%) was to increase FV intake (+ 125 g), resulting in a 1.2% reduction in all-cause mortality (16,307 deaths/year). The cheapest (- 9.9%) was to reduce red and processed meat intake (- 40 g), resulting in a 1.1% reduction in all-cause mortality (14,272 deaths/year). The combined intervention was, on average, 3.7% cheaper than the baseline cost, resulting in an increase in diet cost for 30% of the population (45-22% in the lower- and higher-income groups); all-cause mortality would be reduced by 3.8% (49,488 deaths/year). Interventions targeting red and processed meats would reduce emissions and resource use by 35-55%, in addition to reducing 2300 DALYs/year.
conclusionA meaningful number of deaths can be avoided and environmental impacts reduced through moderate and potentially affordable diet modifications.
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.