ArticleNature communications2024
Microbiome-based correction for random errors in nutrient profiles derived from self-reported dietary assessments.
Article in Nature communications, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Review
- Advancing Precision Nutrition Through Multimodal Data and Artificial Intelligence.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2026Review
- Reducing bias and enhancing equity in AI-enabled precision nutrition: addressing measurement error across wearables, multiomics, and dietary data.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Review
- Decay of Food DNA in the Gastrointestinal Tract: Implications for Molecular Dietary Records.Nutrients · 2025Article
- Deep learning for microbiome-informed precision nutrition.National science review · 2025Article
- Health effects of intermittent fasting and the role of artificial intelligence technologies in optimizing its clinical translation.AIMS public health · 2025Review
- Microbiome-based correction for random errors in nutrient profiles derived from self-reported dietary assessments.Nature communications · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Since dietary intake is challenging to directly measure in large-scale cohort studies, we often rely on self-reported instruments (e.g., food frequency questionnaires, 24-hour recalls, and diet records) developed in nutritional epidemiology. Those self-reported instruments are prone to measurement errors, which can lead to inaccuracies in the calculation of nutrient profiles. Currently, few computational methods exist to address this problem. In the present study, we introduce a deep-learning approach-Microbiome-based nutrient profile corrector (METRIC), which leverages gut microbial compositions to correct random errors in self-reported dietary assessments using 24-hour recalls or diet records. We demonstrate the excellent performance of METRIC in minimizing the simulated random errors, particularly for nutrients metabolized by gut bacteria in both synthetic and three real-world datasets. Additionally, we find that METRIC can still correct the random errors well even without including gut microbial compositions. Further research is warranted to examine the utility of METRIC to correct actual measurement errors in self-reported dietary assessment instruments.
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.