Cited by 24Nutrition and Health in AgingMuscle metabolism and nutritionNutrition and Health Studies

Protein-Enriched Bread and Readymade Meals Increase Community-Dwelling Older Adults' Protein Intake in a Double-Blind Randomized Controlled Trial

Open access
Ziylan, Canan, Haveman-Nies, Annemien, Kremer, Stefanie, de Groot, Lisette C.P.G.M.·2017·Journal of the American Medical Directors Association

Abstract

Objectives Sufficient protein intake can decrease undernutrition risk among community-dwelling older adults. This study aimed to increase community-dwelling older adults' daily protein intake with acceptable and applicable protein-enriched bread and readymade meals at home. Design Double-blind randomized controlled trial of 2 weeks. Setting Senior residential center in the Netherlands. Participants Forty-two community-dwelling elderly residents (≥65 years) participated, with a mean age of 74.0 ± 6.9 years and mean body mass index of 28.5 ± 3.45 kg/m 2. Intervention The intervention group (n = 22) received 5 protein-enriched readymade meals and plentiful protein-enriched bread during 2 weeks, whereas the control group (n = 20) received the regular equivalents during these 2 weeks. Measurements Food intake was assessed by using dietary food record-assisted 24-hour recalls and by weighing meal leftovers. Acceptability of the enriched products was assessed with product evaluation questionnaires and in-depth interviews. Results Mean intake of food products (g) and energy (kJ) did not differ significantly between the control and the intervention groups. Total daily protein intake in the intervention group was 14.6 g higher than in the control group (87.7 vs 73.1 g/d, P = .004). Expressed in g/kg body weight per day, protein intake was significantly higher in the intervention group than in the control group (1.25 vs 0.99 g/kg/d, P = .003). The enriched products were equally liked, scoring 7.7 of 10.0. The in-depth interviews with participants indicated high acceptability of the enriched products. Conclusion This study showed that community-dwelling older adults' protein intake can be increased to recommended levels with highly acceptable and applicable protein-enriched products that fit into the normal eating pattern. Future studies should investigate whether this effect is maintained in the long-term among a frailer population.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jamda.2016.08.018

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Eight studies investigate the effect of dietary enrichment.

    “Eight studies investigate the effect of dietary enrichment [25-32].”

    From ESPEN guideline on hospital nutrition (2021) · cites this paper as [29]

  • In community-dwelling older adults, protein intake could be increased by acceptable and applicable protein-enriched products.

    “protein intake could be increased by acceptable and 444 applicable protein-enriched products.”

    From ESPEN guideline on hospital nutrition (2021) · cites this paper as [29]

  • The recommended level for protein intake varies between studies but most studies referring to a recommendation are in the span between 1.0 and 1.5 g/kg BW/day.

    “The recommended level for protein intake varies between 513 studies but most studies referring to a recommendation are in the span between 1.0 – 1.5 g/kg 514 BW/day [28, 29, 32, 36].”

    From ESPEN guideline on hospital nutrition (2021) · cites this paper as [29]

    The supplied passages contain no match. Searches of our copy for protein-intake recommendations and the 1.0–1.5 g/kg BW/day range returned no passages, so I cannot verify what recommendation this paper gives or whether it supports the claim about most studies. (LLM, conf=0.70)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ziylan, C., Haveman-Nies, A., Kremer, S., & de Groot, L. C. P. G. M.
Affiliations
Wageningen University & Research (NL)
Corresponding author
Ziylan, Canan
Venue
Journal of the American Medical Directors Association
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2017-02
Volume
18
Issue
2
Pages
145-151
ISSN
1525-8610 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2535640736
Cited by
24
References
5
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 4 · 2017: 1
FWCI
1.14
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of the American Medical Directors Association (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Socio-Environmental Systems Modeling (acceptedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Nutrition and Health in Aging
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Cell Biology › Muscle metabolism and nutrition
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Nutrition and Health Studies
Keywords
protein intake, community-dwelling older adults, undernutrition prevention, dietary supplementation, energy intake
MeSH terms
Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Bread, Dietary Proteins, Double-Blind Method, Feeding Behavior, Female, Food, Fortified, Homes for the Aged, Humans, Male, Malnutrition, Meals

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review