ArticleBMC nutrition2024
Diet quality in medical trainees: a cross-sectional assessment comparing medical students and primary care residents using the Rapid Eating Assessment for Participants-shortened version.
Article in BMC nutrition, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Assessing Risk of Nephrolithiasis in Urology Residents: Are We Practicing What We Preach?Cureus · 2026Article
- Diet quality and eating behaviors in Brazilian medical undergraduates: associations with quality of life, sleep, and physical activity.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe diet quality of the US population is significantly unhealthy, with critical long-term implications for the nation's health. A few studies have explored diet quality in the future primary care workforce. This cross-sectional study quantifies the diet quality of medical students and primary care residents at a Midwestern college of medicine in the United States.
methods250 medical students and 148 primary care residents were surveyed electronically utilizing the Rapid Eating Assessment for Participants-Shortened Version (REAP-S). The survey consists of 13 questions that can be scored on a scale from 1 to 3, along with 3 questions that are not scored. The average REAP-S score for a US omnivorous diet is 32 (range 13 to 39) with higher scores indicating a higher quality diet. We obtained average REAP-S scores for all respondents and descriptive summary statistics for individual REAP-S items. Students' REAP-S total scores were compared to those of residents and the interaction between student/resident status and BMI category on REAP-S total scores were analyzed using analyses of variance. Differences between students and residents on BMI categories and other outcomes (individual REAP-S items, pandemic dietary and weight changes) were analyzed using Chi-Square Tests of Independence or Fisher's Exact Tests.
resultsMedical students (n = 99; 39.6% response rate) had a significantly higher mean REAP-S score (30.5, SD = 3.9) than primary care residents (n = 72; 49% response rate) (mean = 28.6, SD = 3.9; p = 0.006). Total mean REAP-S scores were significantly higher for those with BMI < 25 (mean = 30.8, SD = 3.7) than for those with BMI > = 25 (mean = 28.3, SD = 4.0; p < 0.001). There was not a statistically significant interaction between role (student vs. resident) and BMI category on total REAP-S scores (p = 0.39). Most respondents (89.3%) indicated that they were willing to improve their diet.
conclusionOur data suggest that the diet quality of surveyed medical students and primary care residents, as quantified by the REAP-S, is suboptimal. Early detection and improvement of diet quality may be necessary for our medical profession trainees to avert potential long-term adverse cardiometabolic health outcomes, and to optimize the health of our future primary care workforce.
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.