SynthesisJournal of human nutrition and dietetics : the official journal of the British Dietetic Association2026
What Advanced Practice Roles Are Dietitians Undertaking? A Mixed Methods Systematic Review.
Synthesis in Journal of human nutrition and dietetics : the official journal of the British Dietetic Association, 2026. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAs health systems globally are facing unprecedented demands, allied health clinicians undertaking advanced practice (AP) roles are increasingly supporting medical professionals, improving health system efficiencies and outcomes. The aim of this mixed methods systematic review was to identify what AP roles dietitians are undertaking and examine how these roles align with the British Dietetic Association (BDA) definition of AP.
methodsA systematic review of the literature was conducted on the 22nd August 2025 via MEDLINE, CINAHL and Web of Science with the following inclusion criteria; English language, peer-reviewed journals articles of any date describing dietitians undertaking AP roles as critiqued by the reviewers against the BDA AP capabilities pillars of advanced practice. Papers not published in the English language, conference abstracts, grey literature and studies describing entry level dietitian roles/routine nutrition care were excluded. Risk of bias was evaluated using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) critical appraisal tools, synthesis followed the JBI convergent integrated approach to mixed methods systematic reviews and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses statement 2020 (PRISMA 2020) was used to guide reporting.
resultsOf the 2209 studies identified by the search strategy, six studies were included in the systematic review. Dates of publication ranged from 1993 to 2014, with papers from the United States of America (n = 5) and the United Kingdom (n = 1). Studies included four original research studies, one Delphi survey and one narrative review. Five specialist area AP roles were identified; inherited metabolic diseases (IMD) dietitian, advanced level specialist practitioner (in paediatric, metabolic, renal specialties) and advanced level practitioners in diabetes and two generalist roles. Key themes were synthesized for each of the BDA AP pillars within the included studies. DISCUSSION: Despite interest in AP internationally, this systematic review identified only a small number of dietetic roles meeting all BDA AP pillars. Geographical, jurisdictional and dietetic association differences in definitions of AP, along with apparent underreporting in the literature, suggest this review likely understates the depth and breadth of contemporary dietetic AP. High-quality research published by dietitians practicing at an advanced level, clearly stating alignment with AP definitions/frameworks is required to solidify the value of dietetic AP within the global health system. OTHER: No funding was sought for this review.
trial registrationPROSPERO: Registration Number CRD420251127046 (https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD420251127046).
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.