Coming from opposite parts of the spectrum of interpreting studies about Nutri-Score: Suggestion of publication bias cannot be denied

IF 2.4 Q3 NUTRITION & DIETETICS PharmaNutrition Pub Date : 2024-03-21 DOI:10.1016/j.phanu.2024.100387
Stephan Peters , Hans Verhagen
{"title":"Coming from opposite parts of the spectrum of interpreting studies about Nutri-Score: Suggestion of publication bias cannot be denied","authors":"Stephan Peters ,&nbsp;Hans Verhagen","doi":"10.1016/j.phanu.2024.100387","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>The front-of-pack label Nutri-Score is currently proposed as the system of choice in seven EU countries. However, there is still much scientific debate about the validation and efficacy of Nutri-Score and there is much discussion about author affiliation and study outcome.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Recently we published our paper: Nutri-Score and publication bias: A complete literature review of the substantiation of the effectiveness of the front-of-pack logo Nutri-Score Peters &amp; Verhagen, PharmaNutrition 27 C (2024) 100380. This paper received a commentary paper by the developers of Nutri-Score: M. Touvier et al., 2024 “Rebuttal to the paper published by S. Peters and H. Verhagen”. We herewith provide an invited commentary to that rebuttal paper, which further supports the observed publication bias.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>In this response to the rebuttal, we primarily respond on the scientific issues raised in the rebuttal and explain more about our alleged conflict of interest and our motivation to write the paper. Moreover, we basically thank the authors of the rebuttal paper for, perhaps ironically but essentially, confirming our analysis: there is a publication bias versus affiliation.</p></div><div><h3>Discussion</h3><p>Overall, the available evidence is clearly limited and biased, and more research is needed to substantiate or disprove the effectiveness of Nutri-Score.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":20049,"journal":{"name":"PharmaNutrition","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PharmaNutrition","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2213434424000136","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"NUTRITION & DIETETICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

The front-of-pack label Nutri-Score is currently proposed as the system of choice in seven EU countries. However, there is still much scientific debate about the validation and efficacy of Nutri-Score and there is much discussion about author affiliation and study outcome.

Methods

Recently we published our paper: Nutri-Score and publication bias: A complete literature review of the substantiation of the effectiveness of the front-of-pack logo Nutri-Score Peters & Verhagen, PharmaNutrition 27 C (2024) 100380. This paper received a commentary paper by the developers of Nutri-Score: M. Touvier et al., 2024 “Rebuttal to the paper published by S. Peters and H. Verhagen”. We herewith provide an invited commentary to that rebuttal paper, which further supports the observed publication bias.

Results

In this response to the rebuttal, we primarily respond on the scientific issues raised in the rebuttal and explain more about our alleged conflict of interest and our motivation to write the paper. Moreover, we basically thank the authors of the rebuttal paper for, perhaps ironically but essentially, confirming our analysis: there is a publication bias versus affiliation.

Discussion

Overall, the available evidence is clearly limited and biased, and more research is needed to substantiate or disprove the effectiveness of Nutri-Score.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在解释有关 Nutri-Score 的研究时,他们的观点截然相反:不可否认存在出版偏见
背景目前有七个欧盟国家建议将包装前标签 Nutri-Score 作为首选系统。然而,科学界对 Nutri-Score 的验证和有效性仍有很多争议,对作者所属和研究结果也有很多讨论:我们最近发表了论文:《营养素评分与出版偏差》:Peters & Verhagen, PharmaNutrition 27 C (2024) 100380。本文收到了 Nutri-Score 开发者的评论文章:M.Touvier等人,2024年 "对S.Peters和H.Verhagen发表的论文的反驳"。结果在这篇对反驳的回应中,我们主要回应了反驳中提出的科学问题,并对我们所谓的利益冲突和我们撰写论文的动机做了更多解释。此外,我们基本上感谢反驳论文的作者,他们的观点或许具有讽刺意味,但基本上证实了我们的分析:相对于附属关系,存在出版偏差。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
PharmaNutrition
PharmaNutrition Agricultural and Biological Sciences-Food Science
CiteScore
5.70
自引率
3.10%
发文量
33
审稿时长
12 days
期刊最新文献
Advancements in psoriasis management: Integrating nutrient supplement with gut-brain-skin connection Can L-Methionine and S-Adenosyl-L-Methionine Effectively Mitigate Scopolamine-Induced Cognitive and Motor Deficits in Mice? Melatonin supplementation in preclinical colitis models: A systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis on inflammation, oxidative stress, and colon repair Efficacy and safety of liraglutide on C-reactive protein (CRP) in adults with type 2 diabetes: A GRADE-assessed systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis of controlled trials Editorial Board
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1