Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2010 Aug;92(2):273-6.
doi: 10.3945/ajcn.2009.29092. Epub 2010 May 26.

Systematic review to support the development of nutrient reference intake values: challenges and solutions

Mei Chung  1 , Ethan M Balk, Stanley Ip, Jounghee Lee, Teruhiko Terasawa, Gowri Raman, Thomas Trikalinos, Alice H Lichtenstein, Joseph Lau
Affiliations

Systematic review to support the development of nutrient reference intake values: challenges and solutions

Mei Chung et al. Am J Clin Nutr. 2010 Aug.

Abstract

Workshops sponsored by the Institute of Medicine (IOM) and the World Health Organization suggested that incorporating systematic (evidence) reviews into the process of updating nutrient reference values would provide a comprehensive and distilled evidence document to decision makers and enhance the transparency of the decision-making process the IOM used in recommending the Dietary Reference Intake values (DRIs) for US and Canadian populations. At the request of the US and Canadian government sponsors of the ongoing review of the 1997 vitamin D and calcium DRI values, the Tufts Evidence-based Practice Center performed a systematic review for the current DRI Committee to use early in its deliberations. We described the approach used to include systematic review into the IOM process for updating nutrient reference values and highlighted major challenges encountered along with the solutions used. The challenges stemmed from the need to review and synthesize a large number of primary studies covering a broad range of outcomes. We resolved these challenges by 1) working with a technical expert panel to prioritize and select outcomes of interest, 2) developing methods to use existing systematic reviews and documenting the limitations by doing so, 3) translating results from studies not designed to address issues of interest by using a transparent process, and 4) establishing tailored quality-assessment tools to assist in decision making. The experiences described in this article can serve as a basis for future improvements in systematic reviews of nutrients and to better integrate systematic review into development of future nutrient reference values.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Russell RM. Current framework for DRI development: what are the pros and cons? Nutr Rev 2008;66:455–8 - PubMed
    1. Institute of Medicine The development of DRIs 1994–2004: lessons learned and new challenges—workshop summary. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2008
    1. Chung M, Balk EM, Brendel M, et al. Vitamin D and calcium: a systematic review of health outcomes. Evidence report no. 183. (Prepared by the Tufts Evidence-based Practice Center under contract no. HHSA 290-2007-10055-I.) Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, 2009. Available from: http://www.ahrq.gov/downloads/pub/evidence/pdf/vitadcal/vitadcal.pdf (cited 22 April 2010). (AHRQ publication no. 09-E105.)
    1. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Methods reference guide for effectiveness and comparative effectiveness reviews, version 1.0. Rockville, MD: US Department of Health and Human Services, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, 2007. Available from: http://effectivehealthcare.ahrq.gov/repFiles/2007_10DraftMethodsGuide.pdf (cited 22 April 2010)
    1. Lichtenstein AH, Yetley EA, Lau J. Application of systematic review methodology to the field of nutrition. J Nutr 2008;138:2297–306 - PMC - PubMed

Publication types