ArticleEuropean journal of clinical nutrition2025
Dietary intakes and nutritional adequacy of Australians consuming plant-based diets compared to a regular meat-eating diet.
Article in European journal of clinical nutrition, 2025. 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.
- Nutrient and Discretionary Food Intake in Vegan Adult Australians: A Cross-Sectional Study.Nutrition bulletin · 2026Article
- Fatty acid profile, vitamin D, and iodine status in Taiwanese vegans, vegetarians, and omnivores.Tzu chi medical journalArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
objectivesDespite the healthful nature of plant-based diets (PBDs) there is potential for nutritional inadequacies. This study aimed to compare dietary intakes and nutritional adequacy in Australians following PBDs compared a regular meat-eating diet. SUBJECTS/
methodsA cross-sectional study of adults (n = 240) aged 30-75 yrs, habitually following dietary patterns for ≥6 months; vegan, lacto-vegetarian, pesco-vegetarian, semi-vegetarian or regular meat-eater (n = 48 per group). Dietary intakes were assessed using validated food frequency questionnaires and dietitian-administered diet histories. Multivariable regression adjusted for sex, age, BMI, race, energy intake and physical activity.
resultsCompared to regular meat-eaters, vegans and lacto-ovo vegetarians had significantly lower intakes of protein (4-5 EN%), saturated fat (2-4 EN%), trans fat, cholesterol, vitamin B
conclusionPBDs, while higher in beneficial nutrients and wholefood groups than regular meat-eaters, may lead to nutritional inadequacies if not planned appropriately.
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.