Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40073305›Full record

ArticlePloS one2025

A methodological framework for deriving the German food-based dietary guidelines 2024: Food groups, nutrient goals, and objective functions.

Anne Carolin Schäfer, Heiner Boeing, Rozenn Gazan, Johanna Conrad, Kurt Gedrich, Christina Breidenassel, Hans Hauner, Anja Kroke, Jakob Linseisen, Stefan Lorkowski and 5 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

15 authors.

Anne Carolin SchäferGerman Nutrition Society, Bonn, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5607-491X
Heiner BoeingDepartment of Epidemiology (closed), German Institute of Human Nutrition Potsdam-Rehbruecke, Nuthetal, Germany.
Rozenn GazanMS-Nutrition, Marseille, France.
Johanna ConradGerman Nutrition Society, Bonn, Germany.
Kurt GedrichResearch Group Public Health Nutrition, ZIEL-Institute for Food & Health, Technical University of Munich, Freising, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7321-2555
Christina BreidenasselGerman Nutrition Society, Bonn, Germany.
Hans HaunerInstitute of Nutritional Medicine, Else Kröner Fresenius Center for Nutritional Medicine, School of Medicine and Health, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Anja KrokeDepartment of Nutritional, Food and Consumer Sciences, University of Applied Sciences, Fulda, Germany.
Jakob LinseisenEpidemiology, University of Augsburg, University Hospital Augsburg, Augsburg, Germany.
Stefan LorkowskiInstitute of Nutritional Sciences, Friedrich Schiller University Jena, Jena, Germany.
Ute NöthlingsDepartment of Nutrition and Food Sciences, Nutritional Epidemiology, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5789-2252
Margrit RichterGerman Nutrition Society, Bonn, Germany.
Lukas SchwingshacklInstitute for Evidence in Medicine, Medical Center-University of Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.
Florent VieuxMS-Nutrition, Marseille, France.
Bernhard WatzlDepartment of Physiology and Biochemistry of Nutrition, Max Rubner-Institut, Karlsruhe, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFor a growing number of food-based dietary guidelines (FBDGs), diet optimization is the tool of choice to account for the complex demands of healthy and sustainable diets. However, decisions about such optimization models' parameters are rarely reported nor systematically studied.

objectivesThe objectives were to develop a framework for (i) the formulation of decision variables based on a hierarchical food classification system; (ii) the mathematical form of the objective function; and (iii) approaches to incorporate nutrient goals.

methodsTo answer objective (i), food groups from FoodEx2 levels 3-7 were applied as decision variables in a model using acceptability constraints (5th and 95th percentile for food intakes of German adults (n = 10,419)) and minimizing the deviation from the average observed dietary intakes. Building upon, to answer objectives (ii) and (iii), twelve models were run using decision variables from FoodEx2 level 3 (n = 255), applying either a linear or squared and a relative or absolute way to deviate from observed dietary intakes, and three different lists of nutrient goals (allNUT-DRV, incorporating all nutrient goals; modNUT-DRV excluding nutrients with limited data quality; modNUT-AR using average requirements where applicable instead of recommended intakes).

resultsFoodEx2 food groups proved suitable as diet optimization decision variables. Regarding deviation, the largest differences were between the four different objective function types, e.g., in the linear-relative modNUT-DRV model, 46 food groups of the observed diet were changed to reach the model's goal, in linear-absolute 78 food groups, squared-relative 167, and squared-absolute 248. The nutrient goals were fulfilled in all models, but the number of binding nutrient constraints was highest in the linear-relative models (e.g. allNUT-DRV: 11 vs. 7 in linear-absolute).

conclusionConsidering the various possibilities to operationalize dietary aspects in an optimization model, this study offers valuable contributions to a framework for developing FBDGs via diet optimization.

Indexed as

FoodNutrientsNutrition PolicyAdultDietFemaleGermanyHumansMaleMiddle AgedModels, TheoreticalNutrients

Identifiers

PMID40073305
PMCPMC11903038

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.