Dietary protein intake and health-related outcomes: a methodological protocol for the evidence evaluation and the outline of an evidence to decision framework underlying the evidence-based guideline of the German Nutrition Society

Springer Science and Business Media LLC - Tập 61 - Trang 2091-2101 - 2022
Anja Kroke1, Annemarie Schmidt2, Anna M. Amini2, Nicole Kalotai2, Andreas Lehmann2, Julia Haardt2, Jürgen M. Bauer3, Heike A. Bischoff-Ferrari4,5, Heiner Boeing6, Sarah Egert7, Sabine Ellinger7, Tilman Kühn8,9, Sandrine Louis10, Stefan Lorkowski11,12, Katharina Nimptsch13, Thomas Remer14, Matthias B. Schulze15,16, Roswitha Siener17, Gabriele I. Stangl18, Dorothee Volkert19, Armin Zittermann20, Anette E. Buyken21, Bernhard Watzl10, Lukas Schwingshackl22
1Department of Nutritional, Food and Consumer Sciences, Fulda University of Applied Sciences, Fulda, Germany
2German Nutrition Society, Bonn, Germany
3Center for Geriatric Medicine and Network Aging Research, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany
4Department of Aging Medicine and Aging Research, University Hospital and University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
5City Hospital Zurich-Waid, Zurich, Switzerland
6German Institute of Human Nutrition, Potsdam-Rehbruecke, Nuthetal, Germany
7Institute of Nutrition and Food Science, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany
8Institute for Global Food Security, Queen’s University Belfast, Belfast, UK
9Heidelberg Institute of Global Health, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
10Department of Physiology and Biochemistry of Nutrition, Max Rubner-Institut, Karlsruhe, Germany
11Institute of Nutritional Sciences, Friedrich Schiller University Jena, Jena, Germany
12Competence Cluster for Nutrition and Cardiovascular Health (nutriCARD) Halle-Jena-Leipzig, Jena, Germany
13Molecular Epidemiology Research Group, Max Delbrück Center for Molecular Medicine (MDC) in the Helmholtz Association, Berlin, Germany
14DONALD Study Center Dortmund, Department of Nutritional Epidemiology, Institute of Nutrition and Food Science, University of Bonn, Dortmund, Germany
15Department of Molecular Epidemiology, German Institute of Human Nutrition Potsdam-Rehbruecke, Nuthetal, Germany
16Institute of Nutritional Science, University of Potsdam, Potsdam, Germany
17Department of Urology, University Stone Center, University Hospital Bonn, Bonn, Germany
18Institute of Agricultural and Nutritional Sciences, Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg, Halle (Saale), Germany
19Institute for Biomedicine of Aging, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Nuremberg, Germany
20Clinic for Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Herz- und Diabeteszentrum Nordrhein-Westfalen, Bad Oeynhausen, Germany
21Institute of Nutrition, Consumption and Health, Faculty of Natural Sciences, Paderborn University, Paderborn, Germany
22Institute for Evidence in Medicine, Medical Center - University of Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany

Tóm tắt

The present work aimed to delineate (i) a revised protocol according to recent methodological developments in evidence generation, to (ii) describe its interpretation, the assessment of the overall certainty of evidence and to (iii) outline an Evidence to Decision framework for deriving an evidence-based guideline on quantitative and qualitative aspects of dietary protein intake. A methodological protocol to systematically investigate the association between dietary protein intake and several health outcomes and for deriving dietary protein intake recommendations for the primary prevention of various non-communicable diseases in the general adult population was developed. The developed methodological protocol relies on umbrella reviews including systematic reviews with or without meta-analyses. Systematic literature searches in three databases will be performed for each health-related outcome. The methodological quality of all selected systematic reviews will be evaluated using a modified version of AMSTAR 2, and the outcome-specific certainty of evidence for systematic reviews with or without meta-analysis will be assessed with NutriGrade. The general outline of the Evidence to Decision framework foresees that recommendations in the derived guideline will be given based on the overall certainty of evidence as well as on additional criteria such as sustainability. The methodological protocol permits a systematic evaluation of published systematic reviews on dietary protein intake and its association with selected health-related outcomes. An Evidence to Decision framework will be the basis for the overall conclusions and the resulting recommendations for dietary protein intake.

Tài liệu tham khảo

Wolfram G, Bechthold A, Boeing H et al (2015) Evidence-based guideline of the German Nutrition Society: fat intake and prevention of selected nutrition-related diseases. Ann Nutr Metab 67(3):141–204. https://doi.org/10.1159/000437243 Deutsche Gesellschaft für Ernährung e. V. (2006) Fettkonsum und Prävention ausgewählter ernährungsmitbedingter Krankheiten - Evidenzbasierte Leitlinie Hauner H, Bechthold A, Boeing H et al (2012) Evidence-based guideline of the German Nutrition Society: carbohydrate intake and prevention of nutrition-related diseases. Ann Nutr Metab 60(Suppl 1):1–58. https://doi.org/10.1159/000335326 Nussbaumer-Streit B, Grillich L, Glechner A et al (2018) GRADE: Von der Evidenz zur Empfehlung oder Entscheidung - ein systematischer und transparenter Ansatz, um gut informierte Entscheidungen im Gesundheitswesen zu treffen. 1: Einleitung (GRADE: Evidence to Decision (EtD) frameworks - a systematic and transparent approach to making well informed healthcare choices. 1: Introduction). Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes 134:57–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.zefq.2018.05.004 Alonso-Coello P, Schünemann HJ, Moberg J et al (2016) GRADE Evidence to Decision (EtD) frameworks: a systematic and transparent approach to making well informed healthcare choices. 1: Introduction. BMJ 353:i2016. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.i2016 National Institute for Health Research PROSPERO. International prospective register of systematic reviews. https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/. Accessed 8 Jun 2020 Deutsche Gesellschaft für Ernährung e. V. (2014) Evidenzbasierte DGE-Leitlinien zur Prävention chronischer Krankheiten. Darstellung der allgemeinen methodischen Vorgehensweise. https://www.dge.de/fileadmin/public/doc/ws/Allgemeine-methodische-Vorgehensweise-DGE-Leitlinien.pdf. Accessed 17 Apr 2020 Higgins JPT, Thomas J, Chandler J et al (2019) Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions version 6.0 (updated July 2019). Available from www.training.cochrane.org/handbook. Accessed 20 July 2020 Schwingshackl L, Balduzzi S, Beyerbach J et al (2021) Evaluating agreement between bodies of evidence from randomised controlled trials and cohort studies in nutrition research: meta-epidemiological study. BMJ 374:n1864. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n1864 Shea BJ, Reeves BC, Wells G et al (2017) AMSTAR 2: a critical appraisal tool for systematic reviews that include randomised or non-randomised studies of healthcare interventions, or both. BMJ 358:j4008. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.j4008 Schwingshackl L, Knüppel S, Schwedhelm C et al (2016) Perspective: NutriGrade: a scoring system to assess and judge the meta-evidence of randomized controlled trials and cohort studies in nutrition research. Adv Nutr 7(6):994–1004. https://doi.org/10.3945/an.116.013052 Schwingshackl L, Schünemann HJ, Meerpohl JJ (2020) Improving the trustworthiness of findings from nutrition evidence syntheses: assessing risk of bias and rating the certainty of evidence. Eur J Nutr. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00394-020-02464-1 Schünemann HJ, Cuello C, Akl EA et al (2019) 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 111:105–114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2018.01.012 Moberg J, Oxman AD, Rosenbaum S et al (2018) The GRADE Evidence to Decision (EtD) framework for health system and public health decisions. Health Res Policy Sys 16(1):45. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12961-018-0320-2 Schwingshackl L, Watzl B, Meerpohl JJ (2020) The healthiness and sustainability of food based dietary guidelines. BMJ 369:m2417. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.m2417 Springmann M, Spajic L, Clark MA et al (2020) The healthiness and sustainability of national and global food based dietary guidelines: modelling study. BMJ 370:m2322. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.m2322 Zeraatkar D, Johnston BC, Guyatt G (2019) Evidence collection and evaluation for the development of dietary guidelines and public policy on nutrition. Annu Rev Nutr 39:227–247. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-nutr-082018-124610 Murad MH, Mustafa R, Morgan R et al (2016) Rating the quality of evidence is by necessity a matter of judgment. J Clin Epidemiol 74:237–238. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2015.11.018 Pollock M, Fernandes RM, Becker LA et al (2021) Chapter V overviews of reviews. In: Higgins JPT, Thomas J, Chandler J, Cumpston M, Li T, Page MJ, Welch VA (eds) Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions version 6.2 (updated February 2021). Available from www.training.cochrane.org/handbook. Accessed 22 Mar 2021
Thông tin
Thông tin xuất bản

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Tập 61

2091-2101

Thông tin tác giả