Skip to main content

Evaluating the Process to Develop the Dietary Guidelines for Americans, 2020-2025 A Midcourse Report (2022) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:

Appendix F: Selected Systematic Review Methodologies 2015 Versus 2020
Pages 257-266

The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.


From page 257...
... Appendix F Selected Systematic Review Methodologies 2015 Versus 20201 TABLE F-1  Comparison of Selected Systematic Review Methodologies 2015 Versus 2020 2015 2020 Formulation "DGAC members TEP used for B-24, but not other subof research developed the SR comms questions to be questions and worked addressed in SR with NEL staff to complete SR." "DGAC made all substantive decisions required during the process." continued 1 The title of this appendix and Table F-1 were modified after release of a prepublication version of the report to the sponsor to clarify that this is not a comprehensive list of methodological comparisons.
Read the entire page →
From page 258...
... pop, including those who are healthy and/or those at risk of chronic disease." • Also specified that NESR included studies that enroll some subjects with a disease • Excluded studies based solely on individuals with disease, as this would be a clinical practice guideline
Read the entire page →
From page 259...
... The analytic framework serves as the foundation for the rest of the systematic review process, and informs the inclusion/exclusion criteria and literature search strategy, data extraction and risk of bias assessments, and the strategy for synthesizing the evidence to develop and grade conclusion statements." continued
Read the entire page →
From page 260...
... To minimize bias, revisions strategies that included to the criteria after studies had been appropriate databases and reviewed were discouraged. Any revisions search terms to identify to the criteria that occurred were literature to answer each documented with dates and rationales." SR question." Screening: Screening: NESR analysts worked jointly with the "The results of the committee members to establish inclusion literature search were and exclusion criteria that were tailored to screened by the NEL the systematic review question addressed.
Read the entire page →
From page 261...
... Volunteers from across the United States with Both analysts used data extraction form advanced degrees in withina DistillerSR software. nutrition or a related field who were trained "Types of data typically extracted to review individual include study design, sample size research articles included (i.e., baseline and analytic sample in NEL systematic size, attrition)
Read the entire page →
From page 262...
... conclusions and criteria to evaluate grading and grade the strength 5 domains: of available evidence ROB supporting each Consistency conclusion statement." Directness Precision 5 domains: Generalizability ROB Consistency Study design also was a critical Directness consideration in the process of grading. Precision Generalizability NESR does not consider publication bias as a grading criterion.b
Read the entire page →
From page 263...
... These and methodological advances that recommendations can be are needed to strengthen the body used to inform research of evidence on a particular topic. agendas and further Rationales for the necessity of inform policymakers."c additional or stronger research also may have been provided with the research recommendations." continued
Read the entire page →
From page 264...
... were to proceed using existing determined to be out of date, the SRs/MA rather than review was updated using the methods complete an independent described below." review of the primary literature." "NESR's systematic review methodology (described above in "Finally, for some "Synthesize Evidence, Develop questions, the committee Conclusion Statements, Grade the used existing reports as Evidence, and Identify Research the primary source of Recommendations") for developing evidence to answer a conclusion statements and grading the question, but chose to strength of the evidence was applied.
Read the entire page →
From page 265...
... NESR staff then reviewed the comments, addressed editorial comments, and proposed edits to the relevant subcommittee … revisions were then made based on subcomm discussion." NOTE: ARS = Agricultural Research Service; DGAC = Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee; GRADE = Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation; HHS = U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; MA = meta-analysis; NEL = Nutrition Evidence Library; NEL BAT = Nutrition Evidence Library Bias Assessment Tool; NESR = Nutrition Evidence Systematic Review; PICO = population, intervention/exposure, comparator, and outcome of interest; RCT = randomized controlled trial; ROB = risk of bias; SR = systematic review; TEP = technical expert panel; USDA = U.S.
Read the entire page →

Key Terms

  • nesr analysts
  • exclusion criteria
  • conclusion statements
  • literature search
  • review question

  • relevant existing
  • existing reports
  • data extraction
  • existing report
  • prepublication report

  • text modified
  • evidence library
  • identify research
  • nel process
  • bias assessment

  • consider publication
  • research articles
  • nutrition evidence
  • existing review
  • nel bat

  • study design
  • review update
  • nutrition policy
  • grading criterion
  • assessed using

  • publication bias
  • controlled trial
  • review individual
  • analysts independently
  • synthesize evidence


    • This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
    More information on Chapter Skim is available.