ReviewNutrition journal2024
An unbiased, sustainable, evidence-informed Universal Food Guide: a timely template for national food guides.
Review in Nutrition journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 11 papers, 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Dietary Carbohydrates and ADHD Symptoms: A Systematic Review.Nutrients · 2026Pooled it
- Mycotoxin exposure following an eight-week vegan or meat-rich dietary intervention: a randomized-controlled trial.NPJ science of food · 2026Article
- Plant-based diets for human health with implications for cardiometabolic health, gut microbiome, and nutritional adequacy.Frontiers in nutrition · 2026Review
- Priority of nutrition and exercise in depression management: triangulating mini-review of past and recent evidence with clinical practice guidelines.Journal of health, population, and nutrition · 2025Review
- Whole blood count data and hematological parameters in US vegetarians: a cross-sectional study.European journal of nutrition · 2025Article
- Supplementation Behavior and Expenditures in Healthy German Vegans, Lacto-Ovo-Vegetarians and Omnivores: A Cross-Sectional Study.American journal of lifestyle medicine · 2025Article
- Analyzing dietary exposure to critical nutrients on a plant-based diet using the food- and total nutrient index.Nutrition journal · 2025Article
- Specific surface area changes and functional potential exploration ofFood chemistry: X · 2025Article
- Randomised controlled interventions on physical activity, diet or their dual approach to better public health and the links to body mass index in 10-19 years: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMJ public health · 2025Article
- A Plant-Based Food Guide Adapted for Low-Fat Diets: The VegPlate Low-Fat (VP_LF).Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Correction: An unbiased, sustainable, evidence-informed Universal Food Guide: a timely template for national food guides.Nutrition journal · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAlthough national food guides are designed, ostensibly, to translate scientific evidence with respect to food, dietary patterns, and health, their development has increasingly become a corporate/political process as well as scientific one; often with corporate/political influences overriding science. Our aim was to construct an unbiased, sustainable, evidence-informed Universal Food Guide to serve as a template for countries to develop their unique guides, thereby, provide a valid resource for health professionals, health authorities, and the public.
methodsTo address our aim, we conducted an integrative review of multiple evidence-informed sources (e.g., established databases, evidence syntheses, scholarly treatises, and policy documents) related to four areas: 1. Food guides' utility and conflicts of interest; 2. The evidence-based healthiest diet; 3. Constituents of the Universal Food Guide template; and 4. Implications for population health; regulation/governance; environment/climate/planetary health; and ethics.
resultsThe eating pattern that is healthiest for humans (i.e., most natural, and associated with maximal health across the life cycle; reduced non-communicable disease (NCD) risk; and minimal end-of-life illness) is whole food, low fat, plant-based, especially vegan, with the absence of ultra-processed food. Disparities in national food guide recommendations can be explained by factors other than science, specifically, corporate/political interests reflected in heavily government-subsidized, animal-sourced products; and trends toward dominance of daily consumption of processed/ultra-processed foods. Both trends have well-documented adverse consequences, i.e., NCDs and endangered environmental/planetary health. Commitment to an evidence-informed plant-based eating pattern, particularly vegan, will reduce risks/manifestations of NCDs; inform healthy food and nutrition policy regulation/governance; support sustainable environment/climate and planetary health; and is ethical with respect to 'best' evidence-based practice, and human and animal welfare.
conclusionThe Universal Food Guide that serves as a template for national food guides is both urgent and timely given the well-documented health-harming influences that corporate stakeholders/politicians and advisory committees with conflicts of interest, exert on national food guides. Such influence contributes to the largely-preventable NCDs and environmental issues. Policy makers, health professionals, and the public need unbiased, scientific evidence as informed by the Universal Food Guide, to inform their recommendations and choices.
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.