Worksheet
 
Yes  
 
Can't Determine  
 
No  
 
NA  
1. Would implementing the studied intervention or procedure (if found successful) result in improved outcomes for the patients/clients/population group? (Not Applicable for some epidemiological studies)
   
2. Did the authors study an outcome (dependent variable) or topic that the patients/clients/population group would care about?
   
3. Is the focus of the intervention or procedure (independent variable) or topic of study a common issue of concern to nutrition or dietetics practice?
   
4. Is the intervention or procedure feasible? (NA for some epidemiological studies)
   
1. Was the research question clearly stated?
 
2. Was the selection of study subjects/patients free from bias?
     
3. Were study groups comparable?
   
4. Was method of handling withdrawals described?
   
5. Was blinding used to prevent introduction of bias?
   
6. Were intervention/therapeutic regimens/exposure factor or procedure and any comparison(s) described in detail? Were interveningfactors described?
     
7. Were outcomes clearly defined and the measurements valid and reliable?
 
8. Was the statistical analysis appropriate for the study design and type of outcome indicators?
   
9. Are conclusions supported by results with biases and limitations taken into consideration?
     
10. Is bias due to study’s funding or sponsorship unlikely?
     
Worksheet
 
Yes  
 
Can't Determine  
 
No  
 
NA  
1. Will the answer if true, have a direct bearing on the health of patients?
 
2. Is the outcome or topic something that patients/clients/population groups would care about?
 
3. Is the problem addressed in the review one that is relevant to nutrition or dietetics practice?
 
4. Will the information, if true, require a change in practice?
 
1. Was the question for the review clearly focused and appropriate?
 
2. Was the search strategy used to locate relevant studies comprehensive? Were the databases searched and the search termsused described?
 
3. Were explicit methods used to select studies to include in the review? Were inclusion/exclusion criteria specified and appropriate? Were selection methods unbiased?
 
4. Was there an appraisal of the quality and validity of studies included in the review? Were appraisal methods specified, appropriate, and reproducible?
 
5. Were specific treatments/interventions/exposures described? Were treatments similar enough to be combined?
 
6. Was the outcome of interest clearly indicated? Were other potential harms and benefits considered?
 
7. Were processes for data abstraction, synthesis, and analysis described? Were they applied consistently across studies and groups? Was there appropriate use of qualitative and/or quantitative synthesis? Was variation in findings among studies analyzed? Were heterogeneity issued considered? If data from studies were aggregated for meta-analysis, was the procedure described?
 
8. Are the results clearly presented in narrative and/or quantitative terms? If summary statistics are used, are levels of significance and/or confidence intervals included?
 
9. Are conclusions supported by results with biases and limitations taken into consideration? Are limitations of the review identified and discussed?
 
10. Was bias due to the review’s funding or sponsorship unlikely?
 
 
Research Design and Implementation: Primary Research
  Arvidsson et al 2004 Avenell A et al 2004 Benassi-Evans et al 2009 Bopp MJ et al 2008 Buscemi S, Verga S et al, 2009 Capel F et al 2008 de Luis D, Sagrado M et al, 2009 Frisch S et al 2009 Gordon MM et al 2008 Halton TL et al 2004 Halyburton et al 2007 Hession M et al 2009 Jenkins DJ et al 2009 Johnston et al 2006 Johnstone et al 2008 Keogh et al 2008 Krieger JW et al 2006 Leidy et al 2007 Lim et al 2009 Lopez-Fontana CM, Sanchez-Villegas A et al, 2009 Mahon AK, Flynn MG et al, 2007 McAuley KA et al 2005 McLaughlin et al 2006 McMillan-Price et al 2006 Miller et al 2009 Nickols-Richardson SM, Coleman MD et al 2005 Noakes M, Foster P et al, 2006 Nordmann AJ et al 2006 Rankin and Turpyn 2007 Sacks FM, Bray GA et al, 2009 Shai et al 2008 Tay et al 2008 Viguerie N, Vidal H et al, 2005 Volek JS, Phinney SD et al, 2009 Wal JS, McBurney MI et al, 2007 White AM, Johnston SC et al, 2007
Overall Quality Rating Positive Positive Positive Positive Positive Positive Positive Positive Neutral Positive Positive Positive Neutral Positive Positive Positive Positive Positive Neutral Positive Positive Positive Positive Positive Positive Positive Positive Positive Positive Positive Positive Positive Neutral Positive Neutral Positive
Relevance Questions
1. Would implementing the studied intervention or procedure (if found successful) result in improved outcomes for the patients/clients/population group? (Not Applicable for some epidemiological studies)
Yes
 
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
 
Yes
 
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
N/A
 
2. Did the authors study an outcome (dependent variable) or topic that the patients/clients/population group would care about?
Yes
 
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
 
Yes
 
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
N/A
 
3. Is the focus of the intervention or procedure (independent variable) or topic of study a common issue of concern to nutrition or dietetics practice?
Yes
 
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
 
Yes
 
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
N/A
 
4. Is the intervention or procedure feasible? (NA for some epidemiological studies)
Yes
 
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
 
Yes
 
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
N/A
 
 
Validity Questions
1. Was the research question clearly stated?
Yes
 
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
 
Yes
 
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
2. Was the selection of study subjects/patients free from bias?
Yes
 
 
Yes
 
???
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
No
 
 
Yes
 
 
???
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
No
 
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
No
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
3. Were study groups comparable?
Yes
 
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
No
 
No
 
 
Yes
 
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
 
Yes
 
No
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
4. Was method of handling withdrawals described?
Yes
 
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
 
Yes
 
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
No
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
 
Yes
 
No
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
No
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
5. Was blinding used to prevent introduction of bias?
Yes
 
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
No
 
 
Yes
 
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
6. Were intervention/therapeutic regimens/exposure factor or procedure and any comparison(s) described in detail? Were interveningfactors described?
Yes
 
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
 
Yes
 
 
???
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
No
 
Yes
 
7. Were outcomes clearly defined and the measurements valid and reliable?
Yes
 
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
 
Yes
 
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
8. Was the statistical analysis appropriate for the study design and type of outcome indicators?
Yes
 
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
N/A
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
 
Yes
 
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
9. Are conclusions supported by results with biases and limitations taken into consideration?
Yes
 
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
No
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
 
Yes
 
 
???
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
No
 
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
No
 
Yes
 
10. Is bias due to study’s funding or sponsorship unlikely?
Yes
 
 
No
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
???
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
 
Yes
 
 
???
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
Yes
 
No
 
Yes
 
 
 
Research Design and Implementation: Review Articles
  Arvidsson et al 2004 Avenell A et al 2004 Benassi-Evans et al 2009 Bopp MJ et al 2008 Buscemi S, Verga S et al, 2009 Capel F et al 2008 de Luis D, Sagrado M et al, 2009 Frisch S et al 2009 Gordon MM et al 2008 Halton TL et al 2004 Halyburton et al 2007 Hession M et al 2009 Jenkins DJ et al 2009 Johnston et al 2006 Johnstone et al 2008 Keogh et al 2008 Krieger JW et al 2006 Leidy et al 2007 Lim et al 2009 Lopez-Fontana CM, Sanchez-Villegas A et al, 2009 Mahon AK, Flynn MG et al, 2007 McAuley KA et al 2005 McLaughlin et al 2006 McMillan-Price et al 2006 Miller et al 2009 Nickols-Richardson SM, Coleman MD et al 2005 Noakes M, Foster P et al, 2006 Nordmann AJ et al 2006 Rankin and Turpyn 2007 Sacks FM, Bray GA et al, 2009 Shai et al 2008 Tay et al 2008 Viguerie N, Vidal H et al, 2005 Volek JS, Phinney SD et al, 2009 Wal JS, McBurney MI et al, 2007 White AM, Johnston SC et al, 2007
Overall Quality Rating Positive Positive Positive Positive Positive Positive Positive Positive Neutral Positive Positive Positive Neutral Positive Positive Positive Positive Positive Neutral Positive Positive Positive Positive Positive Positive Positive Positive Positive Positive Positive Positive Positive Neutral Positive Neutral Positive
Relevance Questions
1. Will the answer if true, have a direct bearing on the health of patients?  
Yes
 
             
Yes
 
 
Yes
 
       
Yes
 
                   
Yes
 
               
2. Is the outcome or topic something that patients/clients/population groups would care about?  
Yes
 
             
Yes
 
 
Yes
 
       
Yes
 
                   
Yes
 
               
3. Is the problem addressed in the review one that is relevant to nutrition or dietetics practice?  
Yes
 
             
Yes
 
 
Yes
 
       
Yes
 
                   
Yes
 
               
4. Will the information, if true, require a change in practice?  
Yes
 
             
Yes
 
 
Yes
 
       
Yes
 
                   
Yes
 
               
 
Validity Questions
1. Was the question for the review clearly focused and appropriate?  
Yes
 
             
Yes
 
 
Yes
 
       
Yes
 
                   
Yes
 
               
2. Was the search strategy used to locate relevant studies comprehensive? Were the databases searched and the search termsused described?  
Yes
 
             
Yes
 
 
Yes
 
       
Yes
 
                   
Yes
 
               
3. Were explicit methods used to select studies to include in the review? Were inclusion/exclusion criteria specified and appropriate? Were selection methods unbiased?  
Yes
 
             
Yes
 
 
Yes
 
       
Yes
 
                   
Yes
 
               
4. Was there an appraisal of the quality and validity of studies included in the review? Were appraisal methods specified, appropriate, and reproducible?  
Yes
 
             
Yes
 
 
Yes
 
       
Yes
 
                   
Yes
 
               
5. Were specific treatments/interventions/exposures described? Were treatments similar enough to be combined?  
Yes
 
             
Yes
 
 
Yes
 
       
Yes
 
                   
Yes
 
               
6. Was the outcome of interest clearly indicated? Were other potential harms and benefits considered?  
Yes
 
             
Yes
 
 
Yes
 
       
Yes
 
                   
Yes
 
               
7. Were processes for data abstraction, synthesis, and analysis described? Were they applied consistently across studies and groups? Was there appropriate use of qualitative and/or quantitative synthesis? Was variation in findings among studies analyzed? Were heterogeneity issued considered? If data from studies were aggregated for meta-analysis, was the procedure described?  
Yes
 
             
Yes
 
 
Yes
 
       
Yes
 
                   
Yes
 
               
8. Are the results clearly presented in narrative and/or quantitative terms? If summary statistics are used, are levels of significance and/or confidence intervals included?  
Yes
 
             
Yes
 
 
Yes
 
       
Yes
 
                   
Yes
 
               
9. Are conclusions supported by results with biases and limitations taken into consideration? Are limitations of the review identified and discussed?  
Yes
 
             
Yes
 
 
Yes
 
       
Yes
 
                   
Yes
 
               
10. Was bias due to the review’s funding or sponsorship unlikely?  
Yes
 
             
Yes
 
 
Yes
 
       
Yes
 
                   
Yes