ReviewFrontiers in public health2026
Trends and perspectives in global Food-Based Dietary Guidelines: a narrative review.
Review in Frontiers in public health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Bridging the Gaps: A Critical Review of National Dietary and Lifestyle Guidelines for Pregnant Women in the Eastern Mediterranean Region.Maternal and child health journal · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Food-Based Dietary Guidelines (FBDGs) are key public health tools intended to promote healthy eating and prevent non-communicable diseases. Many countries have recently revised their guidelines, but cross-country comparisons remain limited. Objective: To compare the latest national FBDGs in selected countries and identify common and divergent approaches in their development and communication. Methods: A comparative document review was conducted for eight countries with publicly accessible and recently updated FBDGs: the United States, United Kingdom, Australia, Germany, Italy, Denmark, China, and Korea. Official FBDG documents, scientific background reports, and implementation resources were reviewed and compared using a structured narrative approach with attention to governance structure, visual models, food group classification, evidence sources, and sustainability integration. This structured narrative review focuses on selected national FBDGs and does not constitute a comprehensive systematic review of all existing global guidelines. Results: All eight countries adopted periodic revisions and strengthened alignment with updated nutrition science. Many transitioned from pyramid-style graphics to simplified visual models, with expanded digital engagement and practical consumer resources. Cultural specificity remained visible, such as the Mediterranean pattern in Italy, a plant-forward model in Denmark, and incorporation of fermented foods and rice staples in East Asia. Differences in food grouping and nutrient emphasis reflected national dietary challenges and data availability. Integration of environmental sustainability varied considerably, ranging from explicit inclusion throughout the guidance to minimal or no mention. Public communication strategies increasingly emphasized practicality through consumer testing, targeted messaging, and alignment with food service guidelines. Conclusions: Contemporary FBDGs show convergence toward improved scientific rigor, cultural appropriateness, and enhanced communication, whereas adopting sustainability occurred at varying levels. Continued evaluation of development processes and public implementation is warranted to strengthen real-world dietary improvement.
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.