Dietary Assessment and Opportunities to Enhance Nutritional Epidemiology Evidence
Authors: Ross L. Prentice
Journal: Annals of Internal Medicine (2020)

Ideas and Opinions3 March 2020Dietary Assessment and Opportunities to Enhance Nutritional Epidemiology EvidenceRoss L. Prentice, PhDRoss L. Prentice, PhDFred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center and University of Washington, Seattle, Washington (R.L.P.)Author, Article, and Disclosure Informationhttps://doi.org/10.7326/M19-3290 SectionsAboutFull TextPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissions ShareFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail Dietary guidelines are promulgated periodically by the U.S. government (for example, reference 1), as well as by other authoritative bodies, with content substantially based on expert review of pertinent biological considerations and the world nutritional epidemiology literature. These sources contribute to widely held beliefs that adherence to dietary guidelines will reduce the risk for major chronic diseases, including cardiovascular disease, cancer, and diabetes. However, systematic reviews of specific recommended dietary behaviors often conclude that evidence for chronic disease benefits is of low certainty and that any benefits are probably small. Recent examples are provided by systematic reviews of sodium (2), ...References1. U.S. Department of Agriculture, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. 2015–2020 Dietary Guidelines for Americans. 8th ed. Accessed at https://health.gov/dietaryguidelines/2015/guidelines on 17 December 2019. Google Scholar2. Newberry SJ, Chung M, Anderson CAM, et al. Sodium and Potassium Intake: Effects on Chronic Disease Outcomes and Risks. Comparative Effectiveness Review No. 206. (Prepared by the RAND Southern California Evidence-based Practice Center under Contract No. 290-2015-00010-I.) AHRQ Publication No. 18-EHC009-EF. Rockville: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; June 2018. Google Scholar3. Shin JY, Xun P, Nakamura Y, et al. Egg consumption in relation to risk of cardiovascular disease and diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Clin Nutr. 2013;98:146-59. [PMID: 23676423] doi:10.3945/ajcn.112.051318 CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar4. Johnston BC, Zeraatkar D, Han MA, et al. Unprocessed red meat and processed meat consumption: dietary guideline recommendations from the nutritional recommendations (NutriRECS) consortium. Ann Intern Med. 2019. [PMID: 31569235]. doi:10.7326/M19-1621 LinkGoogle Scholar5. Brennan L. The nutritional metabolomics crossroads: how to ensure success for dietary biomarkers [Editorial]. Am J Clin Nutr. 2017;105:293-294. [PMID: 28100510] doi:10.3945/ajcn.116.150847 CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar6. Prentice RL, Pettinger M, Neuhouser ML, et al. Application of blood concentration biomarkers in nutritional epidemiology: example of carotenoid and tocopherol intake in relation to chronic disease risk. Am J Clin Nutr. 2019;109:1189-1196. [PMID: 30915444] doi:10.1093/ajcn/nqy360 CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar7. Schoeller DA. Recent advances from application of doubly labeled water to measurement of human energy expenditure. J Nutr. 1999;129:1765-8. [PMID: 10498745] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar8. Neuhouser ML, Tinker L, Shaw PA, et al. Use of recovery biomarkers to calibrate nutrient consumption self-reports in the Women's Health Initiative. Am J Epidemiol. 2008;167:1247-59. [PMID: 18344516] doi:10.1093/aje/kwn026 CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar9. Prentice RL, Mossavar-Rahmani Y, Huang Y, et al. Evaluation and comparison of food records, recalls, and frequencies for energy and protein assessment by using recovery biomarkers. Am J Epidemiol. 2011;174:591-603. [PMID: 21765003] doi:10.1093/aje/kwr140 CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar10. Zheng C, Beresford SA, Van Horn L, et al. Simultaneous association of total energy consumption and activity-related energy expenditure with risks of cardiovascular disease, cancer, and diabetes among postmenopausal women. Am J Epidemiol. 2014;180:526-35. [PMID: 25016533] doi:10.1093/aje/kwu152 CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar Author, Article, and Disclosure InformationAffiliations: Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center and University of Washington, Seattle, Washington (R.L.P.)Grant Support: By National Institutes of Health grants R01 CA119171 and R01 CA210921.Disclosures: Author has disclosed no conflicts of interest. Form can be viewed at www.acponline.org/authors/icmje/ConflictOfInterestForms.do?msNum=M19-3290.Corresponding Author: Ross L. Prentice, PhD, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Room M3-B821, 1100 Fairview Avenue North, Seattle, WA 98109; e-mail, [email protected]org.Author Contributions: Conception and design: R.L. Prentice.Analysis and interpretation of the data: R.L. Prentice.Drafting of the article: R.L. Prentice.Critical revision for important intellectual content: R.L. Prentice.Final approval of the article: R.L. Prentice.Statistical expertise: R.L. Prentice.Obtaining of funding: R.L. Prentice.Administrative, technical, or logistic support: R.L. Prentice.Collection and assembly of data: R.L. Prentice.This article was published at Annals.org on 28 January 2020. PreviousarticleNextarticle Advertisement FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Metrics Cited byLongitudinal trends in produce purchasing behavior: a descriptive study of transaction level data from loyalty card householdsAn umbrella review of the evidence associating diet and cancer risk at 11 anatomical sitesEfficacy and safety of low and very low carbohydrate diets for type 2 diabetes remission: systematic review and meta-analysis of published and unpublished randomized trial data 3 March 2020Volume 172, Issue 5Page: 354-355KeywordsDietFoodNutrientsNutritionNutritional epidemiologyObservational studiesOverweightSodiumSystematic reviewsUrinary biomarkers ePublished: 28 January 2020 Issue Published: 3 March 2020 Copyright & PermissionsCopyright © 2020 by American College of Physicians. All Rights Reserved.PDF downloadLoading ...