ArticleNutrition today
Best Practices for Communicating Nutrition and Brain Health Science.
Article in Nutrition today. 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The state of the science of nutrition and its relationship to brain health is complex, making dissemination of research findings difficult. One contributing factor is the lack of a consensus on defining brain health. Some organizations emphasize cognitive function (eg, memory, perception, judgment, decline, impairment) and/or the presence of dementia, whereas others use a broader conceptualization to include mood and stress. Regarding nutrition, some studies support specific dietary patterns, such as the MIND (Mediterranean-Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension Intervention for Neurodegenerative Delay) diet, for preserving cognitive function. Others find no effect. Public-facing organizations communicate this science in varying ways to meet consumer and patient needs and interest in preserving brain function as they age. Some organizations have standardized communication methods, whereas others communicate based on topics most salient to the consumer or patient, regardless of the strength of the evidence. This conceptual article reflects a roundtable discussion among stakeholders to document processes for communicating the state of the science to inform best practices moving forward. Six best practices are offered to ensure consistent, evidence-based communication, which is vital in the digital age where misinformation is pervasive.
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.