Nutritional Genomics

NG: Effect on Dietary Intake (2018-19)

Intervention
In adults, what is the effect of incorporating results of genetic testing into nutrition counseling and care, compared to an alternative intervention or control group, on fruit and vegetable intake?
- Conclusion
  In healthy adults, no significant differences in fruit and vegetable intake were observed when results of genetic testing were incorporated into nutrition counseling or care as compared to counseling or care that did not incorporate genetic results.
- Grade: II
  - Grade I means there is Good/Strong evidence supporting the statement;
  - Grade II is Fair;
  - Grade III is Limited/Weak;
  - Grade IV is Expert Opinion Only;
  - Grade V is Not Assignable.
  - High (A) means we are very confident that the true effect lies close to that of the estimate of the effect;
  - Moderate (B) means we are moderately confident in the effect estimate;
  - Low (C) means our confidence in the effect estimate is limited;
  - Very Low (D) means we have very little confidence in the effect estimate.
  - Ungraded means a grade is not assignable.
- Evidence Summary: In adults, what is the effect of incorporating results of genetic testing into nutrition counseling and care, compared to an alternative intervention or control group, on fruit and vegetable intake?
- Search Plan and Results: NG: Incorporating Results of Genetic Testing into Nutrition Counseling or Care (2019)
In adults, what is the effect of different intensities of personalized nutrition counseling that incorporate results of genetic testing into nutrition counseling and care, on fruit and vegetable intake?
- Conclusion
  In one RCT with healthy adults of South-Asian descent, when both the intervention and comparison groups received genetic information related to myocardial infarction (MI) risk (9p21 SNP), there were no significant differences in fruit or vegetable observed when participants received more intensive, personalized nutrition counseling.
- Grade: III
  - Grade I means there is Good/Strong evidence supporting the statement;
  - Grade II is Fair;
  - Grade III is Limited/Weak;
  - Grade IV is Expert Opinion Only;
  - Grade V is Not Assignable.
  - High (A) means we are very confident that the true effect lies close to that of the estimate of the effect;
  - Moderate (B) means we are moderately confident in the effect estimate;
  - Low (C) means our confidence in the effect estimate is limited;
  - Very Low (D) means we have very little confidence in the effect estimate.
  - Ungraded means a grade is not assignable.
- Evidence Summary: In adults, what is the effect of different intensities of personalized nutrition counseling that incorporate results of genetic testing into nutrition counseling and care, on fruit and vegetable intake?
  - Detail
  - Quality Rating Summary
    For a summary of the Quality Rating results, click here.
  - Worksheets
    
    Samaan Z, Schulze K, Middleton C, Irvine J,J oseph P, Mente A, Shah B, Pare G, Desai D, Anand S. South Asian heart risk assessment (SAHARA): randomized controlled trial design and pilot study. JMIR Research Protocols 2013; 2:e33
- Search Plan and Results: NG: Incorporating Results of Genetic Testing into Nutrition Counseling or Care (2019)
In adults, what is the effect of incorporating results of genetic testing into nutrition counseling and care, compared to an alternative intervention or control group, on whole grain, oily fish, red meat and low-fat dairy intake?
- Conclusion
  In healthy adults, no significant differences in intake of whole grains, oily fish, red meat or low fat dairy products were observed when results of genetic testing were incorporated into nutrition counseling or care as compared to counseling or care that did not incorporate genetic results.
- Grade: II
  - Grade I means there is Good/Strong evidence supporting the statement;
  - Grade II is Fair;
  - Grade III is Limited/Weak;
  - Grade IV is Expert Opinion Only;
  - Grade V is Not Assignable.
  - High (A) means we are very confident that the true effect lies close to that of the estimate of the effect;
  - Moderate (B) means we are moderately confident in the effect estimate;
  - Low (C) means our confidence in the effect estimate is limited;
  - Very Low (D) means we have very little confidence in the effect estimate.
  - Ungraded means a grade is not assignable.
- Evidence Summary: In adults, what is the effect of incorporating results of genetic testing into nutrition counseling and care, compared to an alternative intervention or control group, on whole grain, oily fish, red meat and low-fat dairy intake?
- Search Plan and Results: NG: Incorporating Results of Genetic Testing into Nutrition Counseling or Care (2019)
In adults, what is the effect of different intensities of personalized nutrition counseling that incorporate results of genetic testing into nutrition counseling and care, on deep fried food and snack intake?
- Conclusion
  In healthy adults of South-Asian descent, when both the intervention and comparison groups received genetic information related to myocardial infarction (MI) risk (9p21 SNP), there was no significant difference in intake of deep fried foods/snacks observed when participants received more intensive, personalized nutrition counseling.
- Grade: III
  - Grade I means there is Good/Strong evidence supporting the statement;
  - Grade II is Fair;
  - Grade III is Limited/Weak;
  - Grade IV is Expert Opinion Only;
  - Grade V is Not Assignable.
  - High (A) means we are very confident that the true effect lies close to that of the estimate of the effect;
  - Moderate (B) means we are moderately confident in the effect estimate;
  - Low (C) means our confidence in the effect estimate is limited;
  - Very Low (D) means we have very little confidence in the effect estimate.
  - Ungraded means a grade is not assignable.
- Evidence Summary: In adults, what is the effect of different intensities of personalized nutrition counseling that incorporate results of genetic testing into nutrition counseling and care, on deep fried food and snack intake?
  - Detail
  - Quality Rating Summary
    For a summary of the Quality Rating results, click here.
  - Worksheets
    
    Samaan Z, Schulze K, Middleton C, Irvine J,J oseph P, Mente A, Shah B, Pare G, Desai D, Anand S. South Asian heart risk assessment (SAHARA): randomized controlled trial design and pilot study. JMIR Research Protocols 2013; 2:e33
- Search Plan and Results: NG: Incorporating Results of Genetic Testing into Nutrition Counseling or Care (2019)
In adults, what is the effect of incorporating results of genetic testing into nutrition counseling and care, compared to an alternative intervention or control group, on total energy intake and macronutrient distribution?
- Conclusion
  No significant differences in energy intake or macronutrient distribution were observed when results of genetic testing were incorporated into nutrition counseling or care as compared to counseling or care that did not incorporate genetic results.
- Grade: II
  - Grade I means there is Good/Strong evidence supporting the statement;
  - Grade II is Fair;
  - Grade III is Limited/Weak;
  - Grade IV is Expert Opinion Only;
  - Grade V is Not Assignable.
  - High (A) means we are very confident that the true effect lies close to that of the estimate of the effect;
  - Moderate (B) means we are moderately confident in the effect estimate;
  - Low (C) means our confidence in the effect estimate is limited;
  - Very Low (D) means we have very little confidence in the effect estimate.
  - Ungraded means a grade is not assignable.
- Evidence Summary: In adults, what is the effect of incorporating results of genetic testing into nutrition counseling and care, compared to an alternative intervention or control group, on total energy intake and macronutrient distribution?
- Search Plan and Results: NG: Incorporating Results of Genetic Testing into Nutrition Counseling or Care (2019)
In adults, what is the effect of incorporating results of genetic testing into nutrition counseling and care, compared to an alternative intervention or control group, on mono- or polyunsaturated fatty acid intake, including long chain omega 3 fatty acids?
- Conclusion
  No significant differences in the percentage of total energy consumed from mono- or polyunsaturated fatty acids, including long chain omega-3 fatty acids, were observed when results of genetic testing were incorporated into nutrition counseling or care as compared to counseling or care that did not incorporate genetic results.
- Grade: II
  - Grade I means there is Good/Strong evidence supporting the statement;
  - Grade II is Fair;
  - Grade III is Limited/Weak;
  - Grade IV is Expert Opinion Only;
  - Grade V is Not Assignable.
  - High (A) means we are very confident that the true effect lies close to that of the estimate of the effect;
  - Moderate (B) means we are moderately confident in the effect estimate;
  - Low (C) means our confidence in the effect estimate is limited;
  - Very Low (D) means we have very little confidence in the effect estimate.
  - Ungraded means a grade is not assignable.
- Evidence Summary: In adults, what is the effect of incorporating results of genetic testing into nutrition counseling and care, compared to an alternative intervention or control group, on mono- or polyunsaturated fatty acid intake, including long chain omega 3 fatty acids?
- Search Plan and Results: NG: Incorporating Results of Genetic Testing into Nutrition Counseling or Care (2019)
In adults, what is the effect of incorporating results of genetic testing into nutrition counseling and care, compared to an alternative intervention or control group, on omega 3 index?
- Conclusion
  In two RCTs with healthy adults, no significant difference in omega-3 index was observed when results of genetic testing were incorporated into nutrition counseling or care as compared to counseling or care that did not incorporate genetic results.
- Grade: II
  - Grade I means there is Good/Strong evidence supporting the statement;
  - Grade II is Fair;
  - Grade III is Limited/Weak;
  - Grade IV is Expert Opinion Only;
  - Grade V is Not Assignable.
  - High (A) means we are very confident that the true effect lies close to that of the estimate of the effect;
  - Moderate (B) means we are moderately confident in the effect estimate;
  - Low (C) means our confidence in the effect estimate is limited;
  - Very Low (D) means we have very little confidence in the effect estimate.
  - Ungraded means a grade is not assignable.
- Evidence Summary: In adults, what is the effect of incorporating results of genetic testing into nutrition counseling and care, compared to an alternative intervention or control group, on omega 3 index?
- Search Plan and Results: NG: Incorporating Results of Genetic Testing into Nutrition Counseling or Care (2019)
In adults, what is the effect of incorporating results of genetic testing into nutrition counseling and care, compared to an alternative intervention or control group, on saturated fat intake?
- Conclusion
  The effects of incorporating results of genetic testing into nutrition counseling and care, compared to counseling or care that did not incorporate genetic results, on saturated fat intake were unclear. No significant differences in the percentage of total energy consumed from saturated fatty acid (SFA) were observed when results of genetic testing were incorporated into nutrition counseling as compared to counseling or care that did not incorporate genetic results. However, in a stratified analysis of one of these trials, those who were at low risk based on genotype showed significantly less reduction in SFA intake compared to the control group, though there was no differences between high risk participants and controls.
- Grade: III
  - Grade I means there is Good/Strong evidence supporting the statement;
  - Grade II is Fair;
  - Grade III is Limited/Weak;
  - Grade IV is Expert Opinion Only;
  - Grade V is Not Assignable.
  - High (A) means we are very confident that the true effect lies close to that of the estimate of the effect;
  - Moderate (B) means we are moderately confident in the effect estimate;
  - Low (C) means our confidence in the effect estimate is limited;
  - Very Low (D) means we have very little confidence in the effect estimate.
  - Ungraded means a grade is not assignable.
- Evidence Summary: In adults, what is the effect of incorporating results of genetic testing into nutrition counseling and care, compared to an alternative intervention or control group, on saturated fat intake?
- Search Plan and Results: NG: Incorporating Results of Genetic Testing into Nutrition Counseling or Care (2019)
In adults, what is the effect of incorporating results of genetic testing into nutrition counseling and care, compared to an alternative intervention or control group, on fiber intake?
- Conclusion
  In one RCT with healthy adults, there was no significant difference in fiber intake when results of genetic testing were incorporated into nutrition counseling or care as compared to counseling or care that did not incorporate genetic results.
- Grade: III
  - Grade I means there is Good/Strong evidence supporting the statement;
  - Grade II is Fair;
  - Grade III is Limited/Weak;
  - Grade IV is Expert Opinion Only;
  - Grade V is Not Assignable.
  - High (A) means we are very confident that the true effect lies close to that of the estimate of the effect;
  - Moderate (B) means we are moderately confident in the effect estimate;
  - Low (C) means our confidence in the effect estimate is limited;
  - Very Low (D) means we have very little confidence in the effect estimate.
  - Ungraded means a grade is not assignable.
- Evidence Summary: In adults, what is the effect of incorporating results of genetic testing into nutrition counseling and care, compared to an alternative intervention or control group, on fiber intake?
- Search Plan and Results: NG: Incorporating Results of Genetic Testing into Nutrition Counseling or Care (2019)
In adults, what is the effect of incorporating results of genetic testing into nutrition counseling and care, compared to an alternative intervention or control group, on vitamin C intake?
- Conclusion
  In one RCT with healthy adults, there was no significant difference in vitamin C intake were observed when results of genetic testing were incorporated into nutrition counseling or care as compared to counseling or care that did not incorporate genetic results.
- Grade: III
  - Grade I means there is Good/Strong evidence supporting the statement;
  - Grade II is Fair;
  - Grade III is Limited/Weak;
  - Grade IV is Expert Opinion Only;
  - Grade V is Not Assignable.
  - High (A) means we are very confident that the true effect lies close to that of the estimate of the effect;
  - Moderate (B) means we are moderately confident in the effect estimate;
  - Low (C) means our confidence in the effect estimate is limited;
  - Very Low (D) means we have very little confidence in the effect estimate.
  - Ungraded means a grade is not assignable.
- Evidence Summary: In adults, what is the effect of incorporating results of genetic testing into nutrition counseling and care, compared to an alternative intervention or control group, on vitamin C intake?
  - Detail
  - Quality Rating Summary
    For a summary of the Quality Rating results, click here.
  - Worksheets
    
    Nielsen D, El-Sohemy A. Disclosure of genetic information and change in dietary intake: a randomized controlled trial. PloS One 2014; 9:e112665
- Search Plan and Results: NG: Incorporating Results of Genetic Testing into Nutrition Counseling or Care (2019)
In adults, what is the effect of incorporating results of genetic testing into nutrition counseling and care, compared to an alternative intervention or control group, on folate intake?
- Conclusion
  In one RCT with healthy adults, there was no significant difference in folate intake observed when results of genetic testing were incorporated into nutrition counseling and care as compared to counseling or care that did not incorporate genetic results.
- Grade: III
  - Grade I means there is Good/Strong evidence supporting the statement;
  - Grade II is Fair;
  - Grade III is Limited/Weak;
  - Grade IV is Expert Opinion Only;
  - Grade V is Not Assignable.
  - High (A) means we are very confident that the true effect lies close to that of the estimate of the effect;
  - Moderate (B) means we are moderately confident in the effect estimate;
  - Low (C) means our confidence in the effect estimate is limited;
  - Very Low (D) means we have very little confidence in the effect estimate.
  - Ungraded means a grade is not assignable.
- Evidence Summary: In adults, what is the effect of incorporating results of genetic testing into nutrition counseling and care, compared to an alternative intervention or control group, on folate intake?
- Search Plan and Results: NG: Incorporating Results of Genetic Testing into Nutrition Counseling or Care (2019)
In adults, what is the effect of incorporating results of genetic testing into nutrition counseling and care, compared to an alternative intervention or control group, on salt/sodium intake?
- Conclusion
  The role of incorporating results of genetic testing into nutrition counseling and care on sodium/salt intake is unclear. While one small RCT found a significant reduction in sodium intake among participants with the “at-risk” genotype compared to the control, another large RCT observed no significant difference in salt intake when results of genetic testing were incorporated into nutrition counseling and care as compared to counseling or care that did not incorporate genetic results.
- Grade: III
  - Grade I means there is Good/Strong evidence supporting the statement;
  - Grade II is Fair;
  - Grade III is Limited/Weak;
  - Grade IV is Expert Opinion Only;
  - Grade V is Not Assignable.
  - High (A) means we are very confident that the true effect lies close to that of the estimate of the effect;
  - Moderate (B) means we are moderately confident in the effect estimate;
  - Low (C) means our confidence in the effect estimate is limited;
  - Very Low (D) means we have very little confidence in the effect estimate.
  - Ungraded means a grade is not assignable.
- Evidence Summary: In adults, what is the effect of incorporating results of genetic testing into nutrition counseling and care, compared to an alternative intervention or control group, on salt/sodium intake?
- Search Plan and Results: NG: Incorporating Results of Genetic Testing into Nutrition Counseling or Care (2019)
In adults, what is the effect of incorporating results of genetic testing into nutrition counseling and care, compared to an alternative intervention or control group, on added sugar or caffeine intake?
- Conclusion
  In one RCT with healthy adults, no significant differences in intake of added sugars or caffeine were observed when results of genetic testing were incorporated into nutrition counseling or care as compared to counseling or care that did not incorporate genetic testing results.
- Grade: III
  - Grade I means there is Good/Strong evidence supporting the statement;
  - Grade II is Fair;
  - Grade III is Limited/Weak;
  - Grade IV is Expert Opinion Only;
  - Grade V is Not Assignable.
  - High (A) means we are very confident that the true effect lies close to that of the estimate of the effect;
  - Moderate (B) means we are moderately confident in the effect estimate;
  - Low (C) means our confidence in the effect estimate is limited;
  - Very Low (D) means we have very little confidence in the effect estimate.
  - Ungraded means a grade is not assignable.
- Evidence Summary: In adults, what is the effect of incorporating results of genetic testing into nutrition counseling and care, compared to an alternative intervention or control group, on added sugar or caffeine intake?
  - Detail
  - Quality Rating Summary
    For a summary of the Quality Rating results, click here.
  - Worksheets
    
    Nielsen D, El-Sohemy A. Disclosure of genetic information and change in dietary intake: a randomized controlled trial. PloS One 2014; 9:e112665
- Search Plan and Results: NG: Incorporating Results of Genetic Testing into Nutrition Counseling or Care (2019)
In adults, what is the effect of incorporating results of genetic testing into nutrition counseling and care, compared to an alternative intervention or control group, on alcohol intake?
- Conclusion
  In one RCT with healthy Asian-American young adults, incorporating genetic testing results related to risk of alcohol-dependent cancers into nutrition care decreased amount and frequency of alcohol consumption, compared to the control group, for those with at-risk genotypes, but not for those with non-risk genotypes.
- Grade: III
  - Grade I means there is Good/Strong evidence supporting the statement;
  - Grade II is Fair;
  - Grade III is Limited/Weak;
  - Grade IV is Expert Opinion Only;
  - Grade V is Not Assignable.
  - High (A) means we are very confident that the true effect lies close to that of the estimate of the effect;
  - Moderate (B) means we are moderately confident in the effect estimate;
  - Low (C) means our confidence in the effect estimate is limited;
  - Very Low (D) means we have very little confidence in the effect estimate.
  - Ungraded means a grade is not assignable.
- Evidence Summary: In adults, what is the effect of incorporating results of genetic testing into nutrition counseling and care, compared to an alternative intervention or control group, on alcohol intake?
  - Detail
  - Quality Rating Summary
    For a summary of the Quality Rating results, click here.
  - Worksheets
    
    Hendershot C, Otto J, Collins S, Liang T, Wall T. Evaluation of a brief web-based genetic feedback intervention for reducing alcohol-related health risks associated with ALDH2. Annals of Behavioral Medicine 2010; 40:77-88
- Search Plan and Results: NG: Incorporating Results of Genetic Testing into Nutrition Counseling or Care (2019)
In adults, what is the effect of incorporating results of genetic testing into nutrition counseling and care, compared to an alternative intervention or control group, on composite diet scores?
- Conclusion
  In one large RCT with healthy adults, there was no significant difference in Healthy Eating Index (HEI) and the significance in change in Mediterranean Diet (MD) score was unclear when results of genetic testing were incorporated into nutrition counseling or care as compared to counseling or care that did not incorporate genetic results.
- Grade: II
  - Grade I means there is Good/Strong evidence supporting the statement;
  - Grade II is Fair;
  - Grade III is Limited/Weak;
  - Grade IV is Expert Opinion Only;
  - Grade V is Not Assignable.
  - High (A) means we are very confident that the true effect lies close to that of the estimate of the effect;
  - Moderate (B) means we are moderately confident in the effect estimate;
  - Low (C) means our confidence in the effect estimate is limited;
  - Very Low (D) means we have very little confidence in the effect estimate.
  - Ungraded means a grade is not assignable.
- Evidence Summary: In adults, what is the effect of incorporating results of genetic testing into nutrition counseling and care, compared to an alternative intervention or control group, on composite diet scores?
- Search Plan and Results: NG: Incorporating Results of Genetic Testing into Nutrition Counseling or Care (2019)
In children, what is the effect of incorporating results of genetic testing into nutrition counseling and care, compared to an alternative intervention or control group, on dietary intake?
- Conclusion
  No articles examining the effect of incorporating results of genetic testing in nutrition counseling and care, compared to an alternative intervention or control group, on dietary intake in children met inclusion criteria for this systematic review.
- Grade: V
  - Grade I means there is Good/Strong evidence supporting the statement;
  - Grade II is Fair;
  - Grade III is Limited/Weak;
  - Grade IV is Expert Opinion Only;
  - Grade V is Not Assignable.
  - High (A) means we are very confident that the true effect lies close to that of the estimate of the effect;
  - Moderate (B) means we are moderately confident in the effect estimate;
  - Low (C) means our confidence in the effect estimate is limited;
  - Very Low (D) means we have very little confidence in the effect estimate.
  - Ungraded means a grade is not assignable.