ReviewCurrent nutrition reports2024
To What Extent are Food, Culture, Economics and the Natural Environment Reflected in the Language of the Australian and Brazilian Food-based Dietary Guidelines?
Review in Current nutrition reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
purpose of the reviewOur aim was to review literature describing language use in dietary guidelines and explore the extent to which food, culture, economics and the natural environment are reflected in the language of the Australian, compared to the Brazilian food-based dietary guidelines (FBDGs). RECENT
findingsAustralia's FBDGs are based on the best available scientific evidence and claim to "form a bridge between research and evidence-based advice to address the major health challenge of improving Australians' eating patterns". Brazil's FBDGs recognise reasons beyond health for people's food choices. Not a lot of attention has been paid to language use in dietary guidelines. The reviewed studies suggest that language in dietary guidelines should be unambiguous for consumers and evolve with national nutrition priorities. A notable difference between Australian and Brazilian FBDGs was that Australia centralised individuals and individual food groups, whereas Brazil placed people in an ecosystem. Inclusion of words that speak to how food is prepared and eaten, to expressions of culture and community, and to strategies people use for enhancing and protecting livelihoods and planetary health may enhance the relevance of future dietary guidelines.
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.