ArticleFrontiers in nutrition2026
Association between the Chinese diet balance index 2022 and the risk of metabolic syndrome: a cross-sectional analysis in middle-aged and older adults.
Article in Frontiers in nutrition, 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
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Metabolic syndrome (MetS) represents a major public health challenge, yet evidence regarding the relationship between diet quality, as evaluated by the Chinese diet balance index 2022 (DBI-22), and the risk of MetS remains limited. This cross-sectional study aimed to investigate the association between DBI-22 and MetS among middle-aged and older adults. 3,503 participants aged ≥ 45 years in Guangzhou, China, were included. Dietary intake was assessed using 3-day 24-h records, from which the DBI-22 indicators, including high bound score (HBS), low bound score (LBS), and diet quality distance (DQD), were categorized into two tiers. MetS was defined according to the Joint Interim Statement. Multivariable logistic regression was employed to estimate odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs), and restricted cubic splines were used to examine nonlinear associations. Compared to suitable LBS, unsuitable LBS was associated with higher odds of MetS (OR = 1.28, 95% CI: 1.07-1.54;
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.