METHODS: A website called D-PATH was developed, consisting of 6 learning units for managing hypertension. A 4-week program was implemented, and a pre- and post-intervention assessment was conducted to measure acceptability and changes in knowledge, attitude and practice, dietary intake, physical activity, and anthropometric status.
RESULTS: The D-PATH website was acceptable in terms of understandability, actionability and cognitive load. Knowledge, attitude and practice, and physical activity levels were improved, but no changes were noted for dietary intake and blood pressure level.
CONCLUSION: The D-PATH website was accepted and feasible for the intervention study. This study has shed light on using the website to promote behavioral change in patients with cardiometabolic risks.
METHODS: Theoretical 3-day menus were developed as per current renal dietary guidelines to model each diet at 7 different levels of protein intake (0.5-1.2 g/kilograms body weight/day [g/kg/d]). The diets were analyzed for their content of essential amino acids (EAAs) and other essential nutrients.
RESULTS: At an a priori recognized inadequate dietary protein level of 0.5 g/kg/d, all 3 diets failed to meet the Recommended Dietary Allowances (RDAs) for the following EAAs: histidine, leucine, lysine, and threonine. The omnivorous LPD met both the RDA and Estimated Average Requirement at levels of 0.6 g protein/kg/d or more. The lacto-ovo and vegan diets at 0.6 and 0.8 g protein/kg/d, respectively, were below the RDA for lysine. The amounts of several other vitamins and minerals were not uncommonly reduced below the RDA or Adequate Intake with all 3 LPDs.
CONCLUSION: In comparison to omnivorous LPDs, both vegan and lacto-ovo LPDs are more likely to be deficient in several EAAs and other essential nutrients. To provide sufficient amounts of all EAA, vegan and lacto-ovo LPDs must be carefully planned to include adequate amounts of appropriate dietary sources. Supplements of some other essential nutrients may be necessary with all three LPDs.
METHODS: The HD-HEI tool adapted the Malaysian Dietary Guidelines 2010 framework according to HD-specific nutrition guidelines. This HD-HEI was applied to 3-day dietary records of 382 HD patients. Relationships between HD-HEI scores and nutritional parameters were tested by partial correlations. Binary logistic regression models adjusted with confounders were used to determine adjusted odds ratio (adjOR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) for nutritional risk based on HD-HEI scores categorization.
RESULTS: The total HD-HEI score (51.3 ± 10.2) for this HD patient population was affected by ethnicity (Ptrend < .001) and sex (P = .003). No patient achieved "good" DQ (score: 81-100), while DQ of 54.5% patients were classified as "needs improvement" (score: 51-80) and remaining as "poor" (score: 0-51). Total HD-HEI scores were positively associated with dietary energy intake (DEI), dietary protein intake (DPI), dry weight, and handgrip strength, but inversely associated with Dietary Monotony Index (DMI) (all P
DESIGN: Scoping review.
SETTING: Systematic search using PubMed and Web of Science.
RESULTS: We identified twelve tools from seventy-four eligible publications. They were developed for Koreans (n 4), Bangladeshis (n 2), Iranians (n 1), Indians/Malays/Chinese (n 1), Japanese (n 3) and Chinese Americans (n 1). Most tools (10/12) were composed of a dish-based FFQ. Although the development process of a dish list varied among the tools, six studies classified mixed dishes based on the similarity of their characteristics such as food ingredients and cooking methods. Tools were validated against self-reported dietary information (n 9) and concentration biomarkers (n 1). In the eight studies assessing the differences between the tool and a reference, the mean (or median) intake of energy significantly differed in five studies, and 26-83 % of nutrients significantly differed in eight studies. Correlation coefficients for energy ranged from 0·15 to 0·87 across the thirteen studies, and the median correlation coefficients for nutrients ranged from 0·12 to 0·77. Dish-based dietary assessment tools were used in fifty-nine studies mainly to assess diet-disease relationships in target populations.
CONCLUSIONS: Dish-based dietary assessment tools have exclusively been developed and used for Asian-origin populations. Further validation studies, particularly biomarker-based studies, are needed to assess the applicability of tools.