Article

A collaborative effort to apply the evidence-based review process to the field of nutrition: challenges, benefits, and lessons learned.

Tufts-New England Medical Center Evidence-based Practice Center, Institute for Clinical Research and Health Policy Studies, Tufts-New England Medical Center, Boston, MA 02111, USA.
American Journal of Clinical Nutrition (Impact Factor: 6.92). 07/2007; 85(6):1448-56.
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Evidence-based systematic reviews evaluating dietary intake and nutritional interventions are becoming common but are relatively few compared with other applications. Concerns remain that systematic reviews of nutrition topics pose several unique challenges. We present a successful collaboration to systematically review the health effects of a common nutrient, n-3 (or omega-3) fatty acids, across a wide range of clinical conditions. More generally, we discuss the challenges faced and the lessons learned during the review, the benefits of systematic review of nutritional topics, and recommendations for conducting and reviewing nutrition-related studies. Through a structured but flexible process, 3 Evidence-based Practice Centers in the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality program produced 11 reports on a wide range of n-3 fatty acid-related topics. An important resource has been created, through which nutrition and dietetics researchers, clinical dietitians and nutritionists, clinicians, and the general public can understand the state of the science. The process identified challenges and problems in evaluating the health effects of n-3 fatty acid consumption, highlighted challenges to reviewing the human nutrition literature, and yielded recommendations for future research. The goals of these systematic reviews, the processes that were used, the benefits and limitations of the collaboration, and the conclusions of the reviews, including recommendations for future research, are summarized here.

0 Followers
 · 
215 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Cognitive decline in the elderly, particularly Alzheimer's disease (AD), is a major socio-economic and healthcare concern. We review here the literature on one specific aspect of diet affecting AD, that of the omega3 fatty acids, particularly the brain's principle omega3 fatty acid - docosahexaenoic acid (DHA). DHA has deservedly received wide attention as a nutrient supporting both optimal brain development and for cardiovascular health. Our aim here is to critically assess the quality of the present literature as well as the potential of omega3 fatty acids to treat or delay the onset of AD. We start with a brief description of cognitive decline in the elderly, followed by an overview of well recognized biological functions of DHA. We then turn to epidemiological studies, which are largely supportive of protective effects of fish and DHA against risk of AD. However, biological studies, including blood and brain DHA analyses need careful interpretation and further investigation, without which the success of clinical trials with DHA may continue to struggle. We draw attention to some of the methodological issues that need resolution as well as an emerging mechanism that may explain how DHA could be linked to protecting brain function in the elderly.
    Progress in lipid research 09/2009; 48(5):239-56. DOI:10.1016/j.plipres.2009.04.001 · 12.96 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Omega-3 fatty acids are characterized by a double bond at the third carbon atom from the end of the carbon chain. Latterly, long chain polyunsaturated omega-3 fatty acids such as eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA; 20:5Δ5,8,11,14,17) and docosahexanoic acid (DHA; 22:6 Δ4,7,10,13,16,19), which typically only enter the human diet via the consumption of oily fish, have attracted much attention. The health benefits of the omega-3 LC-PUFAs EPA and DHA are now well established. Given the desire for a sustainable supply of omega-LC-PUFA, efforts have focused on enhancing the composition of vegetable oils to include these important fatty acids. Specifically, EPA and DHA have been the focus of much study, with the ultimate goal of producing a terrestrial plant-based source of these so-called fish oils. Over the last decade, many genes encoding the primary LC-PUFA biosynthetic activities have been identified and characterized. This has allowed the reconstitution of the LC-PUFA biosynthetic pathway in oilseed crops, producing transgenic plants engineered to accumulate omega-3 LC-PUFA to levels similar to that found in fish oil. In this review, we will describe the most recent developments in this field and the challenges of overwriting endogenous seed lipid metabolism to maximize the accumulation of these important fatty acids.
    Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology 11/2014; 99(1). DOI:10.1007/s00253-014-6217-2 · 3.81 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Decisions related to a spectrum of nutrition-related public health and clinical concerns must consider many factors and are best informed by evaluating the totality and quality of the evidence. Systematic review (SR) is a structured process to evaluate, compare, and synthesize relevant evidence for the SR-specific question(s). Applications of SR are exemplified here through the discussion of four case studies: research agenda, nutrient reference intakes, dietary guidance, and practice guidelines. Concerns that SR cannot be effectively applied to nutrition evidence because of the lack of an unexposed comparator and the complex homeostasis in nutrition are discussed. Central to understanding the applicability of SR is its flexibility in defining key inclusion criteria and rigorous elements as appropriate for the SR-specific question(s). Through the reduction of bias and random error by explicit, reproducible, comprehensive, and rigorous examination of all of the evidence, SR informs the scientific judgment needed for sound evidence-based public health nutrition. Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Nutrition Volume 34 is July 17, 2014. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/catalog/pubdates.aspx for revised estimates.
    Annual Review of Nutrition 04/2014; DOI:10.1146/annurev-nutr-080508-141240 · 10.46 Impact Factor

Full-text (4 Sources)

Download
98 Downloads
Available from
May 17, 2014