Nutrition Science and Everyday Application - beta v 0.1

FINDING ACCURATE SOURCES OF NUTRITION INFORMATION 109
• The report should disclose the methods used by the researcher(s).
◦ Identify the type of study and where it sits on the hierarchy of
evidence. Keep in mind that a study in humans is likely more meaningful
than one that’s in vitro or in animals; an intervention study is usually more
meaningful than an observational study; and systematic reviews and
meta-analyses often give you the best synthesis of the science to date.
◦ If it’s an intervention study, check for some of the attributes of highquality
research already discussed: randomization, placebo control, and
blinding. If it’s missing any of those, what questions does that raise for
you?
◦ Did the study last for three weeks or three years? Depending on the
research question, studies that are short may not be long enough to
establish a true relationship with the issues being examined.
◦ Were there ten or two hundred participants? If the study was
conducted on only a few participants, it’s less likely that the results would
be valid for a larger population.
◦ What did the participants actually do? It’s important to know if the
study included conditions that people rarely experience or if the
conditions replicated real-life scenarios. For example, a study that claims
to find a health benefit of drinking tea but required participants to drink
15 cups per day may have little relevance in the real world.
◦ Did the researcher(s) observe the results themselves, or did they rely
on self reports from program participants? Self-reported data and results
can be easily skewed by participants, either intentionally or by accident.
• The article should include details on the subjects (or participants) in the
study. Did the study include humans or animals? If human, are any traits/
characteristics noted? You may realize you have more in common with certain
study participants and can use that as a basis to gauge if the study applies to you.
• Statistical significance is not the same as real-world significance. A statistically
significant result is likely to have not occurred by chance, but rather to be a real
difference. However, this doesn’t automatically mean that the difference is relevant
in the real world. For example, imagine a study reporting that a new vitamin
supplement causes a statistically significant reduction in the duration of the
common cold. Colds can be miserable, so that sounds great, right? But what if you
look closer and see that the supplement only shortened study subjects’ colds by
half a day? You might decide that it isn’t worth taking a supplement just to shorten
a cold by half a day. In other words, it’s not a real-world benefit to you.
• Credible reports should disseminate new findings in the context of previous
research. A single study on its own gives you very limited information, but if a
body of literature (previously published studies) supports a finding, it adds
credibility to the study. A news story about a new scientific finding should also
include comments from outside experts (people who work in the same field of