Using Systematic Reviews to Support Future Dietary Reference Intakes A Letter Report (2023) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
Summary
Summary
Pages 1-8
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 1... ...
Are de novo systematic reviews needed in future DRI reviews or can qualified systematic reviews be used?
|
From page 2... ...
The committee will consider past experiences and learning from previous DRI reports, including the report on "Guiding Principles for Basing DRIs on Chronic Disease," the recent meeting of experts, "Strategic Planning for a New Review of Macronutrient Dietary Reference Intakes," and other relevant documents related to the DRI process such as "Devel opment of DRIs 1994-2004: Lessons Learned and New Challenges." The standing committee will produce approximately two letter reports a year. This second letter report will advise the Federal DRI Joint US-Canadian Working Group on three questions: (1)
|
From page 3... ...
CO criteria) for the DRI decisions of interest; • the systematic review was conducted by qualified systematic review methodologists who are both knowledgeable and inde pendent of the user or sponsoring groups;1 • the systematic review has been peer reviewed and is made pub licly available; • the systematic review was not sponsored by parties that have substantial conflicts of interest, including financial conflicts of interest.2 The standing committee notes that non-peer-reviewed reports, theses, dissertations, official documents, informal communication, research-inprogress, or clinical trials produced by government agencies, academic institutions, or business do not meet the standard of evidence for a DRI review and thus would not be included in the process.
|
From page 4... ...
9. The scientific quality of the systematic review should be assessed using a recognized standard quality assessment tool such as AMSTAR.3 Nordic Nutrition Recommendation's Criteria for "Qualified" Systematic Reviews The standing committee used the NNR2022 requirements as a guide in developing its criteria.
|
From page 5... ...
The decision tree recommended by this committee for determining whether a de novo or updated systematic review is needed is shown in Figure S-1. Specific factors such as high-profile topics, or systematic reviews that are inconsistent in their results may need to be considered on a case-by-case base by the user or sponsoring group as they decide whether to update or conduct a de novo systematic review.
|
From page 6... ...
No Yes Is there sufficient additional evidence to update the existing systematic review? No Yes Conduct a de novo systematic Update the existing systematic Use the existing systematic review review review FIGURE S-1. Decision tree for determining whether a de novo or updated existing systematic review is needed to support a Dietary Reference Intake study.
|
From page 7... ...
category was created during the DRI update of sodium and potassium to provide an approach for evaluating relationships between those nutrients and chronic disease risk and for future DRI reviews. Based on this previous work, the standing committee concludes that the EFSA report on setting a Tolerable Upper Intake Level (UL)
|
Key Terms
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.