Investigation of bias due to selective inclusion of study effect estimates in meta-analyses of nutrition research.

We aimed to explore, in a sample of systematic reviews (SRs) with meta-analyses of the association between food/diet and health-related outcomes, whether systematic reviewers selectively included study effect estimates in meta-analyses when multiple effect estimates were available. We randomly selected SRs of food/diet and health-related outcomes published between January 2018 and June 2019. We selected the first presented meta-analysis in each review (index meta-analysis), and extracted from study reports all study effect estimates that were eligible for inclusion in the meta-analysis. We calculated the Potential Bias Index (PBI) to quantify and test for evidence of selective inclusion. The PBI ranges from 0 to 1; values above or below 0.5 suggest selective inclusion of effect estimates more or less favourable to the intervention, respectively. We also compared the index meta-analytic estimate to the median of a randomly constructed distribution of meta-analytic estimates (i.e., the estimate expected when there is no selective inclusion). Thirty-nine SRs with 312 studies were included. The estimated PBI was 0.49 (95% CI 0.42-0.55), suggesting that the selection of study effect estimates from those reported was consistent with a process of random selection. In addition, the index meta-analytic effect estimates were similar, on average, to what we would expect to see in meta-analyses generated when there was no selective inclusion. Despite this, we recommend that systematic reviewers report the methods used to select effect estimates to include in meta-analyses, which can help readers understand the risk of selective inclusion bias in the SRs.

Gamified Smartphone-App Interventions on Behaviour and Metabolic Profile in Patients at Risk of Cardiovascular Disease.

This study assesses how effective gamification in smartphone apps is at enhancing lifestyle and cardiometabolic health in adults at risk of cardiovascular disease. Using a systematic review of six databases, it looked at trials that compared gamified and traditional interventions. Although apps scored highly for functionality, averaging a 4.07 rating, they lacked focus on user engagement. The study reveals that gamification can aid in achievable lifestyle changes and improve cardiometabolic factors, providing insights for future digital health approaches targeting CVD risk reduction.

Testing the Effects of App-Based Motivational Messages on Physical Activity and Resting Heart Rate Through Smartphone App Compliance in Patients With Vulnerable Coronary Artery Plaques: Protocol for a Microrandomized Trial.

BACKGROUND: Achieving the weekly physical activity recommendations of at least 150-300 minutes of moderate-intensity or 75-150 minutes of vigorous-intensity aerobic exercise is important for reducing cardiometabolic risk, but evidence shows that most people struggle to meet these goals, particularly in the mid to long term. OBJECTIVE: The Messages Improving Resting Heart Health (MIRTH) study aims to determine if (1) sending daily motivational messages through a research app is effective in improving motivation and in promoting adherence to physical activity recommendations in men and women with coronary heart disease randomized to a 12-month intensive lifestyle intervention, and (2) the time of the day when the message is delivered impacts compliance with exercise training. METHODS: We will conduct a single-center, microrandomized trial. Participants will be randomized daily to either receive or not receive motivational messages over two 90-day periods at the beginning (phase 1: months 4-6) and at the end (phase 2: months 10-12) of the Lifestyle Vulnerable Plaque Study. Wrist-worn devices (Fitbit Inspire 2) and Bluetooth pairing with smartphones will be used to passively collect data for proximal (ie, physical activity duration, steps walked, and heart rate within 180 minutes of receiving messages) and distal (ie, change values for resting heart rate and total steps walked within and across both phases 1 and 2 of the trial) outcomes. Participants will be recruited from a large academic cardiology office practice (Central Sydney Cardiology) and the Royal Prince Alfred Hospital Departments of Cardiology and Radiology. All clinical investigations will be undertaken at the Charles Perkins Centre Royal Prince Alfred clinic. Individuals aged 18-80 years (n=58) with stable coronary heart disease who have low attenuation plaques based on a coronary computed tomography angiography within the past 3 months and have been randomized to an intensive lifestyle intervention program will be included in MIRTH. RESULTS: The Lifestyle Vulnerable Plaque Study was funded in 2020 and started enrolling participants in February 2022. Recruitment for MIRTH commenced in November 2022. As of September 2023, 2 participants were enrolled in the MIRTH study and provided baseline data. CONCLUSIONS: This MIRTH microrandomized trial will represent the single most detailed and integrated analysis of the effects of a comprehensive lifestyle intervention delivered through a customized mobile health app on smart devices on time-based motivational messaging for patients with coronary heart disease. This study will also help inform future studies optimizing for just-in-time adaptive interventions. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12622000731796; https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=382861. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/46082.

Vegetarian Dietary Patterns and Cardiometabolic Risk in People With or at High Risk of Cardiovascular Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

IMPORTANCE: Plant-based diets are known to improve cardiometabolic risk in the general population, but their effects on people at high risk of cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) remain inconclusive. OBJECTIVE: To assess the association of vegetarian diets with major cardiometabolic risk factors, including low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), systolic blood pressure (SBP), and body weight in people with or at high risk of CVDs. DATA SOURCES: This meta-analysis was registered before the study was conducted. Systematic searches performed included Embase, MEDLINE, CINAHL, and CENTRAL from inception until July 31, 2021. STUDY SELECTION: Eligible randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that delivered vegetarian diets in adults with or at high risk of CVDs and measured LDL-C, HbA1c or SBP were included. Of the 7871 records screened, 29 (0.4%; 20 studies) met inclusion criteria. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two reviewers independently extracted data including demographics, study design, sample size, and diet description, and performed risk of bias assessment. A random-effects model was used to assess mean changes in LDL-C, HbA1c, SBP, and body weight. The overall certainty of evidence was evaluated using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) tool. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Mean differences between groups in changes (preintervention vs postintervention) of LDL-C, HbA1c, and SBP; secondary outcomes were changes in body weight and energy intake. RESULTS: Twenty RCTs involving 1878 participants (range of mean age, 28-64 years) were included, and mean duration of intervention was 25.4 weeks (range, 2 to 24 months). Four studies targeted people with CVDs, 7 focused on diabetes, and 9 included people with at least 2 CVD risk factors. Overall, relative to all comparison diets, meta-analyses showed that consuming vegetarian diets for an average of 6 months was associated with decreased LDL-C, HbA1c, and body weight by 6.6 mg/dL (95% CI, -10.1 to -3.1), 0.24% (95% CI, -0.40 to -0.07), and 3.4 kg (95% CI, -4.9 to -2.0), respectively, but the association with SBP was not significant (-0.1 mm Hg; 95% CI, -2.8 to 2.6). The GRADE assessment showed a moderate level of evidence for LDL-C and HbA1c reduction. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this study, consuming a vegetarian diet was associated with significant improvements in LDL-C, HbA1c and body weight beyond standard therapy in individuals at high risk of CVDs. Additional high-quality trials are warranted to further elucidate the effects of healthy plant-based diets in people with CVDs.

Methods used to select results to include in meta-analyses of nutrition research: A meta-research study.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate how often review authors encounter multiple results from included studies that are eligible for inclusion in a particular meta-analysis, and how often methods to select results are specified. METHODS: MEDLINE and Epistemonikos were searched (January 2018-June 2019) to identify systematic reviews with meta-analysis of the association between food/diet and health-related outcomes. A random sample of these reviews was selected, and for the first presented (index) meta-analysis, rules used to select effect estimates to include in this meta-analysis were extracted from the reviews and their protocols. All effect estimates from the primary studies that were eligible for inclusion in the index meta-analyses were extracted (e.g., when a study report presented effect estimates for blood pressure at 3 weeks and 6 weeks, both unadjusted and adjusted for covariates, and all were eligible for inclusion in a meta-analysis of the effect of red meat consumption on blood pressure, we extracted all estimates, and classified the study as having "multiplicity of results"). RESULTS: Forty-two systematic reviews with 325 studies (104 randomized, 221 non-randomized) were included; 14 reviews had a protocol. In 29% of review protocols and 69% of reviews, authors specified at least one decision rule to select effect estimates when multiple were available. In 68% of studies included in the index meta-analyses, there was at least one type of multiplicity of results. CONCLUSIONS: Authors of systematic reviews of nutrition studies should anticipate encountering multiplicity of results in the included primary studies. Specification of methods to handle multiplicity when designing reviews is therefore recommended.

Conduct and reporting of formula milk trials: systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: To systematically review the conduct and reporting of formula trials. DESIGN: Systematic review. DATA SOURCES: Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) were searched from 1 January 2006 to 31 December 2020. REVIEW METHODS: Intervention trials comparing at least two formula products in children less than three years of age were included, but not trials of human breast milk or fortifiers of breast milk. Data were extracted in duplicate and primary outcome data were synthesised for meta-analysis with a random effects model weighted by the inverse variance method. Risk of bias was evaluated with Cochrane risk of bias version 2.0, and risk of undermining breastfeeding was evaluated according to published consensus guidance. Primary outcomes of the trials included in the systematic review were identified from clinical trial registries, protocols, or trial publications. RESULTS: 22 201 titles were screened and 307 trials were identified that were published between 2006 and 2020, of which 73 (24%) trials in 13 197 children were prospectively registered. Another 111 unpublished but registered trials in 17 411 children were identified. Detailed analysis was undertaken for 125 trials (23 757 children) published since 2015. Seventeen (14%) of these recently published trials were conducted independently of formula companies, 26 (21%) were prospectively registered with a clear aim and primary outcome, and authors or sponsors shared prospective protocols for 11 (9%) trials. Risk of bias was low in five (4%) and high in 100 (80%) recently published trials, mainly because of inappropriate exclusions from analysis and selective reporting. For 68 recently published superiority trials, a pooled standardised mean difference of 0.51 (range -0.43 to 3.29) was calculated with an asymmetrical funnel plot (Egger's test P<0.001), which reduced to 0.19 after correction for asymmetry. Primary outcomes were reported by authors as favourable in 86 (69%) trials, and 115 (92%) abstract conclusions were favourable. One of 38 (3%) trials in partially breastfed infants reported adequate support for breastfeeding and 14 of 87 (16%) trials in non-breastfed infants confirmed the decision not to breastfeed was firmly established before enrolment in the trial. CONCLUSIONS: The results show that formula trials lack independence or transparency, and published outcomes are biased by selective reporting. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO 2018 CRD42018091928.

Strengthening the incentives for responsible research practices in Australian health and medical research funding.

BACKGROUND: Australian health and medical research funders support substantial research efforts, and incentives within grant funding schemes influence researcher behaviour. We aimed to determine to what extent Australian health and medical funders incentivise responsible research practices. METHODS: We conducted an audit of instructions from research grant and fellowship schemes. Eight national research grants and fellowships were purposively sampled to select schemes that awarded the largest amount of funds. The funding scheme instructions were assessed against 9 criteria to determine to what extent they incentivised these responsible research and reporting practices: (1) publicly register study protocols before starting data collection, (2) register analysis protocols before starting data analysis, (3) make study data openly available, (4) make analysis code openly available, (5) make research materials openly available, (6) discourage use of publication metrics, (7) conduct quality research (e.g. adhere to reporting guidelines), (8) collaborate with a statistician, and (9) adhere to other responsible research practices. Each criterion was answered using one of the following responses: "Instructed", "Encouraged", or "No mention". RESULTS: Across the 8 schemes from 5 funders, applicants were instructed or encouraged to address a median of 4 (range 0 to 5) of the 9 criteria. Three criteria received no mention in any scheme (register analysis protocols, make analysis code open, collaborate with a statistician). Importantly, most incentives did not seem strong as applicants were only instructed to register study protocols, discourage use of publication metrics and conduct quality research. Other criteria were encouraged but were not required. CONCLUSIONS: Funders could strengthen the incentives for responsible research practices by requiring grant and fellowship applicants to implement these practices in their proposals. Administering institutions could be required to implement these practices to be eligible for funding. Strongly rewarding researchers for implementing robust research practices could lead to sustained improvements in the quality of health and medical research.

Persistent confusion in nutrition and obesity research about the validity of classic nonparametric tests in the presence of heteroscedasticity: evidence of the problem and valid alternatives.

The use of classic nonparametric tests (cNPTs), such as the Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U tests, in the presence of unequal variance for between-group comparisons of means and medians may lead to marked increases in the rate of falsely rejecting null hypotheses and decreases in statistical power. Yet, this practice remains prevalent in the scientific literature, including nutrition and obesity literature. Some nutrition and obesity studies use a cNPT in the presence of unequal variance (i.e., heteroscedasticity), sometimes because of the mistaken rationale that the test corrects for heteroscedasticity. Herein, we discuss misconceptions of using cNPTs in the presence of heteroscedasticity. We then discuss assumptions, purposes, and limitations of 3 common tests used to test for mean differences between multiple groups, including 2 parametric tests: Fisher's ANOVA and Welch's ANOVA; and 1 cNPT: the Kruskal-Wallis test. To document the impact of heteroscedasticity on the validity of these tests under conditions similar to those used in nutrition and obesity research, we conducted simple simulations and assessed type I error rates (i.e., false positives, defined as incorrectly rejecting the null hypothesis). We demonstrate that type I error rates for Fisher's ANOVA, which does not account for heteroscedasticity, and Kruskal-Wallis, which tests for differences in distributions rather than means, deviated from the expected significance level. Greater deviation from the expected type I error rate was observed as the heterogeneity increased, especially in the presence of an imbalanced sample size. We provide brief tutorial guidance for authors, editors, and reviewers to identify appropriate statistical tests when test assumptions are violated, with a particular focus on cNPTs.

Evidence of misuse of nonparametric tests in the presence of heteroscedasticity within obesity research.

BACKGROUND: Classic nonparametric tests (cNPTs), like Kruskal-Wallis or Mann-Whitney U, are sometimes used to detect differences in central tendency ( i.e., means or medians). However, when the tests' assumptions are violated, such as in the presence of unequal variance and other forms of heteroscedasticity, they are no longer valid for testing differences in central tendency. Yet, sometimes researchers erroneously use cNPTs to account for heteroscedasticity. OBJECTIVE: To document the appropriateness of cNPT use in obesity literature, characterize studies that use cNPTs, and evaluate the citation and public sharing patterns of these articles. METHODS: We reviewed obesity studies published in 2017 to determine whether the authors used cNPTs: (1) to correct for heteroscedasticity (invalid); (2) when heteroscedasticity was clearly not present (correct); or (3) when it was unclear whether heteroscedasticity was present (unclear). Open science R packages were used to transparently search literature and extract data on how often papers with errors have been cited in academic literature, read in Mendeley, and disseminated in the media. RESULTS: We identified nine studies that used a cNPT in the presence of heteroscedasticity (some because of the mistaken rationale that the test corrected for heteroscedasticity), 25 articles that did not explicitly state whether heteroscedasticity was present when a cNPT was used, and only four articles that appropriately reported that heteroscedasticity was not present when a cNPT was used. Errors were found in observational and interventional studies, in human and rodent studies, and only when studies were unregistered. Studies with errors have been cited 113 times, read in Mendeley 123 times, and disseminated in the media 41 times, by the public, scientists, science communicators, and doctors. CONCLUSIONS: Examples of inappropriate use of cNPTs exist in the obesity literature, and those articles perpetuate the errors via various audiences and dissemination platforms.

PROTOCOL: The effects of empowerment-based nutrition interventions on the nutritional status of women of reproductive age in low- and middle-income countries.

The systematic review will answer the follow research questions: (1) What is the effectiveness of different empowerment approaches employed within nutrition interventions on the nutritional status of women of reproductive age in low- and middle-income countries? (2) What implementation and contextual factors contribute to or detract from the effectiveness of these interventions?

Comparison of methodological quality between the 2007 and 2019 Canadian dietary guidelines.

OBJECTIVE: With significant shifts in the dietary recommendations between the 2007 and 2019 Canadian dietary guidelines, such as promoting plant-based food intake, reducing highly processed food intake and advocating the practice of food skills, we compared their differences in guideline development methods. DESIGN: Two reviewers used twenty-five guided criteria to appraise the methods used to develop the most recent dietary guidelines against those outlined in the 2014 WHO Handbook for Guideline Development. SETTING: Canada. PARTICIPANTS: 2007 and 2019 dietary guidelines. RESULTS: We found that the 2019 guidelines were more evidence-based and met 80 % (20/25) of the WHO criteria. For example, systematic reviews and health organisation authoritative reports, but not industry reports, constituted the evidence base for the dietary recommendations. However, recommendations on food sustainability and food skill practice were driven primarily by stakeholders' interests. By contrast, less information was recorded about the process used to develop the 2007 guidelines, resulting in 24 % (6/25) consistency with the WHO standards. CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis suggests that a more transparent and evidence-based approach is used to develop the 2019 Canadian dietary guidelines and that method criteria should support further incorporation of nutrition priorities (food sustainability and food skills) in future dietary guideline development.

Industry funding of patient and health consumer organisations: systematic review with meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate pharmaceutical or medical device industry funding of patient groups. DESIGN: Systematic review with meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: Ovid Medline, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar from inception to January 2018; reference lists of eligible studies and experts in the field. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: Observational studies including cross sectional, cohort, case-control, interrupted time series, and before-after studies of patient groups reporting at least one of the following outcomes: prevalence of industry funding; proportion of industry funded patient groups that disclosed information about this funding; and association between industry funding and organisational positions on health and policy issues. Studies were included irrespective of language or publication type. REVIEW METHODS: Reviewers carried out duplicate independent data extraction and assessment of study quality. An amended version of the checklist for prevalence studies developed by the Joanna Briggs Institute was used to assess study quality. A DerSimonian-Laird estimate of single proportions with Freeman-Tukey arcsine transformation was used for meta-analyses of prevalence. GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) was used to assess the quality of the evidence for each outcome. RESULTS: 26 cross sectional studies met the inclusion criteria. Of these, 15 studies estimated the prevalence of industry funding, which ranged from 20% (12/61) to 83% (86/104). Among patient organisations that received industry funding, 27% (175/642; 95% confidence interval 24% to 31%) disclosed this information on their websites. In submissions to consultations, two studies showed very different disclosure rates (0% and 91%), which appeared to reflect differences in the relevant government agency's disclosure requirements. Prevalence estimates of organisational policies that govern corporate sponsorship ranged from 2% (2/125) to 64% (175/274). Four studies analysed the relationship between industry funding and organisational positions on a range of highly controversial issues. Industry funded groups generally supported sponsors' interests. CONCLUSION: In general, industry funding of patient groups seems to be common, with prevalence estimates ranging from 20% to 83%. Few patient groups have policies that govern corporate sponsorship. Transparency about corporate funding is also inadequate. Among the few studies that examined associations between industry funding and organisational positions, industry funded groups tended to have positions favourable to the sponsor. Patient groups have an important role in advocacy, education, and research, therefore strategies are needed to prevent biases that could favour the interests of sponsors above those of the public. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42017079265.

Best (but oft-forgotten) practices: identifying and accounting for regression to the mean in nutrition and obesity research.

BACKGROUND: Regression to the mean (RTM) is a statistical phenomenon where initial measurements of a variable in a nonrandom sample at the extreme ends of a distribution tend to be closer to the mean upon a second measurement. Unfortunately, failing to account for the effects of RTM can lead to incorrect conclusions on the observed mean difference between the 2 repeated measurements in a nonrandom sample that is preferentially selected for deviating from the population mean of the measured variable in a particular direction. Study designs that are susceptible to misattributing RTM as intervention effects have been prevalent in nutrition and obesity research. This field often conducts secondary analyses of existing intervention data or evaluates intervention effects in those most at risk (i.e., those with observations at the extreme ends of a distribution). OBJECTIVES: To provide best practices to avoid unsubstantiated conclusions as a result of ignoring RTM in nutrition and obesity research. METHODS: We outlined best practices for identifying whether RTM is likely to be leading to biased inferences, using a flowchart that is available as a web-based app at https://dustyturner.shinyapps.io/DecisionTreeMeanRegression/. We also provided multiple methods to quantify the degree of RTM. RESULTS: Investigators can adjust analyses to include the RTM effect, thereby plausibly removing its biasing influence on estimating the true intervention effect. CONCLUSIONS: The identification of RTM and implementation of proper statistical practices will help advance the field by improving scientific rigor and the accuracy of conclusions. This trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT00427193.

Weight loss efficacy of alternate day fasting versus daily calorie restriction in subjects with subclinical hypothyroidism: a secondary analysis.

This study compared the weight loss efficacy of alternate-day fasting (ADF) versus daily calorie restriction (CR) in adults with subclinical hypothyroidism. After 6 months, body weight decreased (P < 0.001) similarly by ADF (-7% ± 1%) and CR (-8% ± 2%). Insulin resistance decreased (P < 0.05) more by ADF versus CR. Free thyroxin and thyroid-stimulating hormone remained unchanged. Thus, ADF and CR produce similar weight loss in this population, without affecting thyroid hormone levels. Novelty Intermittent fasting and daily restriction produce similar reductions in body weight in subjects with subclinical hypothyroidism.

Methodological quality of public health guideline recommendations on vitamin D and calcium : a systematic review protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Current recommendations for vitamin D and calcium in dietary guidelines and bone health guidelines vary significantly among countries and professional organisations. It is unknown whether the methods used to develop these recommendations followed a rigourous process and how the differences in methods used may affect the recommended intakes of vitamin D and calcium. The objectives of this study are (1) collate and compare recommendations for vitamin D and calcium across guidelines, (2) appraise methodological quality of the guideline recommendations and (3) identify methodological factors that may affect the recommended intakes for vitamin D and calcium. This study will make a significant contribution to enhancing the methodological rigour in public health guidelines for vitamin D and calcium recommendations. METHODS AND ANALYSES: We will conduct a systematic review to evaluate vitamin D and calcium recommendations for osteoporosis prevention in generally healthy middle-aged and older adults. Methodological assessment will be performed for each guideline against those outlined in the 2014 WHO handbook for guideline development. A systematic search strategy will be applied to locate food-based dietary guidelines and bone health guidelines indexed in various electronic databases, guideline repositories and grey literature from 1 January 2009 to 28 February 2019. Descriptive statistics will be used to summarise the data on intake recommendation and on proportion of guidelines consistent with the WHO criteria. Logistic regression, if feasible, will be used to assess the relationships between the methodological factors and the recommendation intakes. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval is not required as we will only extract published data or information from the published guidelines. Results of this review will be disseminated through conference presentations and peer-reviewed publications. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42019126452.

Differential Effects of Alternate-Day Fasting Versus Daily Calorie Restriction on Insulin Resistance.

OBJECTIVE: This study compared the effects of alternate-day fasting (ADF) with those of daily calorie restriction (CR) on body weight and glucoregulatory factors in adults with overweight or obesity and insulin resistance. METHODS: This secondary analysis examined the data of insulin-resistant individuals (n = 43) who participated in a 12-month study that compared ADF (25% energy needs on "fast days"; 125% energy needs on alternating "feast days") with CR (75% energy needs every day) and a control group regimen. RESULTS: In insulin-resistant participants, weight loss was not different between ADF (-8% ± 2%) and CR (-6% ± 1%) by month 12, relative to controls (P < 0.0001). Fat mass and BMI decreased (P < 0.05) similarly from ADF and CR. ADF produced greater decreases (P < 0.05) in fasting insulin (-52% ± 9%) and insulin resistance (-53% ± 9%) compared with CR (-14% ± 9%; -17% ± 11%) and the control regimen by month 12. Lean mass, visceral fat mass, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, triglycerides, blood pressure, C-reactive protein, tumor necrosis factor α, and interleukin 6 values remained unchanged. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that ADF may produce greater reductions in fasting insulin and insulin resistance compared with CR in insulin-resistant participants despite similar decreases in body weight.

Beverage intake during alternate-day fasting: Relationship to energy intake and body weight.

BACKGROUND: Alternate-day fasting (ADF) involves a 'famine day' (25% energy intake) and a 'feast day' (ad libitum intake). This secondary analysis examined changes in beverage intake in relation to energy intake and body weight during 12 months of ADF versus daily calorie restriction (CR). METHODS: Obese subjects (n = 100 enrolled, n = 69 completers) were randomized to one of three groups for 12 months: (a) ADF; (b) CR; or (c) control. RESULTS: At baseline, intakes of diet soda, caffeinated beverages, sugar-sweetened soda, alcohol, juice, and milk were similar between groups. There were no statistically significant changes in the intake of these beverages by month 6 or 12 between ADF (feast or famine day), CR, or control groups. Beverage intake was not related to energy intake or body weight at month 6 or 12 in any group. CONCLUSION: These pilot findings suggest that intermittent fasting does not impact beverage intake in a way that affects energy intake or body weight.

Investigation of Risk Of Bias due to Unreported and SelecTively included results in meta-analyses of nutrition research: the ROBUST study protocol.

Background: Dietary guidelines should be informed by systematic reviews (SRs) of the available scientific evidence. However, if the SRs that underpin dietary guidelines are flawed in their design, conduct or reporting, the recommendations contained therein may be misleading or harmful. To date there has been little empirical investigation of bias due to selective inclusion of results, and bias due to missing results, in SRs of food/diet-outcome relationships. Objectives: To explore in SRs with meta-analyses of the association between food/diet and health-related outcomes: (i) whether systematic reviewers selectively included study effect estimates in meta-analyses when multiple effect estimates were available; (ii) what impact selective inclusion of study effect estimates may have on meta-analytic effects, and; (iii) the risk of bias due to missing results (publication bias and selective non-reporting bias) in meta-analyses. Methods: We will systematically search for SRs with meta-analysis of the association between food/diet and health-related outcomes in a generally healthy population, published between January 2018 and June 2019. We will randomly sort titles and abstracts and screen them until we identify 50 eligible SRs. The first reported meta-analysis of a binary or continuous outcome in each SR (the 'index meta-analysis') will be evaluated. We will extract from study reports all study effect estimates that were eligible for inclusion in the index meta-analyses (e.g. from multiple instruments and time points) and will quantify and test for evidence of selective inclusion of results. We will also assess the risk of bias due to missing results in the index meta-analyses using a new tool (ROB-ME). Ethics and dissemination: Ethics approval is not required because information will only be extracted from published studies. Dissemination of the results will be through peer-reviewed publications and presentations at conferences. We will make all data collected from this study publicly available via the Open Science Framework.