HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Purchase Article View Shopping Cart Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by van Binsbergen, J. J Articles by van Weel, C. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by van Binsbergen, J. J Articles by van Weel, C. Agricola Articles by van Binsbergen, J. J Articles by van Weel, C.

Nutrition in primary care: scope and relevance of output from the Cochrane Collaboration^1,2,3

¹ From the Department of Family Medicine and the Department of General Practice and Social Medicine, University Medical Center Nijmegen, Nijmegen, the Netherlands; and the Department of Primary Care and General Practice Division of Primary Care, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom.

There is a lack of randomized controlled nutritional intervention studies with objective clinical endpoints conducted from primary care. Therefore, evidence-based nutritional advice is hampered by 3 factors: (1) a lack of nutritional intervention studies, (2) the difficulty of translating nutritional interventions into practice, and (3) the difficulty of translating to the setting of primary care. A search was made within the publications of the Cochrane Library with potential nutritional aspects. The key words and free text words "nutrition," "food," "foodstuff," "nonpharmacologic," "weight," "body weight," "diet," "dietitian," "general practitioner," and "family physician" were used with the Internet version of the Cochrane Library. Common clinical problems in primary care that have at least some nutritional aspects, are not currently well covered in existing Cochrane reviews. In only 6 cases was nutrition mentioned to some extent. Clinical practice could benefit from a more rigorous approach to nutritional advice. Review groups should be approached to encourage reviewers to cover these aspects in future updates. The existing "comments and criticisms" procedure available on the Cochrane website could be used for this purpose. Having a streamlined Heelsum Workshop Group, based at a university with roots within the various disciplines, linking the experience of daily practical work of the family physician is important, but a small group will need to take overall responsibility for coordination and updating Cochrane reviews on nutrition.

Key Words: Nutrition • general practitioner • Cochrane • randomized controlled clinical trials • evidence-based advice • practice-based advice

This article has been cited by other articles:

				C. van Weel, G. J Hiddink, and A S. Truswell Preface Am. J. Clinical Nutrition, April 1, 2003; 77(4): 999S - 1000. [Full Text] [PDF]

				C. van Weel Dietary advice in family medicine Am. J. Clinical Nutrition, April 1, 2003; 77(4): 1008S - 1010. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A S. Truswell, G. J Hiddink, and J. Blom Nutrition guidance by family doctors in a changing world: problems, opportunities, and future possibilities Am. J. Clinical Nutrition, April 1, 2003; 77(4): 1089S - 1092. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]