Nutrition Users' Guides: Systematic Reviews Part 1 -structured Guide for Methodological Assessment, Interpretation and Application of Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses of Non-randomised Nutritional Epidemiology Studies

Overview

Journal BMJ Nutr Prev Health

Date 2025 Jan 30

PMID 39882294

Authors

Dena Zeraatkar

Russell J de Souza

Gordon H Guyatt

Malgorzata M Bala

Pablo Alonso-Coello

Bradley C Johnston

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Due to the challenges of conducting randomised controlled trials (randomised trials) of dietary interventions, evidence in nutrition often comes from non-randomised (observational) studies of nutritional exposures-called nutritional epidemiology studies. When using systematic reviews of such studies to advise patients or populations on optimal dietary habits, users of the evidence (eg, healthcare professionals such as clinicians, health service and policy workers) should first evaluate the rigour (validity) and utility (applicability) of the systematic review. Issues in making this judgement include whether the review addressed a sensible question; included an exhaustive literature search; was scrupulous in the selection of studies and the collection of data; and presented results in a useful manner. For sufficiently rigorous and useful reviews, evidence users must subsequently evaluate the certainty of the findings, which depends on assessments of risk of bias, inconsistency, imprecision, indirectness, effect size, dose-response and the likelihood of publication bias. Given the challenges of nutritional epidemiology, evidence users need to be diligent in assessing whether studies provide evidence of sufficient certainty to allow confident recommendations for patients regarding nutrition and dietary interventions.

References

Morgan R, Beverly B, Ghersi D, Schunemann H, Rooney A, Whaley P . GRADE guidelines for environmental and occupational health: A new series of articles in Environment International. Environ Int. 2019; 128:11-12. PMC: 6737525. DOI: 10.1016/j.envint.2019.04.016. View

Alonso-Coello P, Carrasco-Labra A, Brignardello-Petersen R, Neumann I, Akl E, Vernooij R . Systematic reviews experience major limitations in reporting absolute effects. J Clin Epidemiol. 2015; 72:16-26. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2015.11.002. View

Zheng M, Allman-Farinelli M, Heitmann B, Rangan A . Substitution of sugar-sweetened beverages with other beverage alternatives: a review of long-term health outcomes. J Acad Nutr Diet. 2015; 115(5):767-779. DOI: 10.1016/j.jand.2015.01.006. View

Murad M, Verbeek J, Schwingshackl L, Filippini T, Vinceti M, Akl E . GRADE GUIDANCE 38: Updated guidance for rating up certainty of evidence due to a dose-response gradient. J Clin Epidemiol. 2023; 164:45-53. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2023.09.011. View

Han M, Leung G, Storman D, Xiao Y, Srivastava A, Talukdar J . Causal language use in systematic reviews of observational studies is often inconsistent with intent: a systematic survey. J Clin Epidemiol. 2022; 148:65-73. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2022.04.023. View

Orsini N, Li R, Wolk A, Khudyakov P, Spiegelman D . Meta-analysis for linear and nonlinear dose-response relations: examples, an evaluation of approximations, and software. Am J Epidemiol. 2011; 175(1):66-73. PMC: 3244608. DOI: 10.1093/aje/kwr265. View

Svensson S, Menkes D, Lexchin J . Surrogate outcomes in clinical trials: a cautionary tale. JAMA Intern Med. 2013; 173(8):611-2. DOI: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2013.3037. View

Hilton Boon M, Thomson H, Shaw B, Akl E, Lhachimi S, Lopez-Alcalde J . Challenges in applying the GRADE approach in public health guidelines and systematic reviews: a concept article from the GRADE Public Health Group. J Clin Epidemiol. 2021; 135:42-53. PMC: 8352629. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2021.01.001. View

OBrien S, Yi Q . How do I interpret a confidence interval?. Transfusion. 2016; 56(7):1680-3. DOI: 10.1111/trf.13635. View

10.

Dallacker M, Hertwig R, Mata J . The frequency of family meals and nutritional health in children: a meta-analysis. Obes Rev. 2018; 19(5):638-653. DOI: 10.1111/obr.12659. View

11.

Schunemann H, Cuello C, Akl E, Mustafa R, Meerpohl J, Thayer K . GRADE guidelines: 18. How ROBINS-I and other tools to assess risk of bias in nonrandomized studies should be used to rate the certainty of a body of evidence. J Clin Epidemiol. 2018; 111:105-114. PMC: 6692166. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2018.01.012. View

12.

Balshem H, Helfand M, Schunemann H, Oxman A, Kunz R, Brozek J . GRADE guidelines: 3. Rating the quality of evidence. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011; 64(4):401-6. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.07.015. View

13.

Zeraatkar D, Johnston B, Bartoszko J, Cheung K, Bala M, Valli C . Effect of Lower Versus Higher Red Meat Intake on Cardiometabolic and Cancer Outcomes: A Systematic Review of Randomized Trials. Ann Intern Med. 2019; 171(10):721-731. DOI: 10.7326/M19-0622. View

14.

Talukdar J, Steen J, Goldenberg J, Zhang Q, Vernooij R, Ge L . Saturated fat, the estimated absolute risk and certainty of risk for mortality and major cancer and cardiometabolic outcomes: an overview of systematic reviews. Syst Rev. 2023; 12(1):179. PMC: 10541715. DOI: 10.1186/s13643-023-02312-3. View

15.

Ierodiakonou D, Garcia-Larsen V, Logan A, Groome A, Cunha S, Chivinge J . Timing of Allergenic Food Introduction to the Infant Diet and Risk of Allergic or Autoimmune Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. JAMA. 2016; 316(11):1181-1192. DOI: 10.1001/jama.2016.12623. View

16.

Picasso M, Lo-Tayraco J, Ramos-Villanueva J, Pasupuleti V, Hernandez A . Effect of vegetarian diets on the presentation of metabolic syndrome or its components: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Nutr. 2018; 38(3):1117-1132. DOI: 10.1016/j.clnu.2018.05.021. View

17.

Yu W, Schmid C, Lichtenstein A, Lau J, Trikalinos T . Empirical evaluation of meta-analytic approaches for nutrient and health outcome dose-response data. Res Synth Methods. 2014; 4(3):256-68. PMC: 4219760. DOI: 10.1002/jrsm.1084. View

18.

Song M, Giovannucci E . Substitution analysis in nutritional epidemiology: proceed with caution. Eur J Epidemiol. 2018; 33(2):137-140. DOI: 10.1007/s10654-018-0371-2. View

19.

Agoritsas T, Merglen A, Shah N, ODonnell M, Guyatt G . Adjusted Analyses in Studies Addressing Therapy and Harm: Users' Guides to the Medical Literature. JAMA. 2017; 317(7):748-759. DOI: 10.1001/jama.2016.20029. View

20.

Atkins D, Eccles M, Flottorp S, Guyatt G, Henry D, Hill S . Systems for grading the quality of evidence and the strength of recommendations I: critical appraisal of existing approaches The GRADE Working Group. BMC Health Serv Res. 2004; 4(1):38. PMC: 545647. DOI: 10.1186/1472-6963-4-38. View