Cited by 61Gut microbiota and healthFood composition and propertiesMicrobial Metabolites in Food Biotechnology

Considerations for best practices in studies of fiber or other dietary components and the intestinal microbiome

Open access
Klurfeld, David M., Davis, Cindy D., Karp, Robert W., Allen-Vercoe, Emma, Chang, Eugene B., Chassaing, Benoit, Fahey, George C., Hamaker, Bruce R. +13 more·2018·American Journal of Physiology-Endocrinology and Metabolism

Abstract

A 2-day workshop organized by the National Institutes of Health and U.S. Department of Agriculture included 16 presentations focused on the role of diet in alterations of the gastrointestinal microbiome, primarily that of the colon. Although thousands of research projects have been funded by U.S. federal agencies to study the intestinal microbiome of humans and a variety of animal models, only a minority addresses dietary effects, and a small subset is described in sufficient detail to allow reproduction of a study. Whereas there are standards being developed for many aspects of microbiome studies, such as sample collection, nucleic acid extraction, data handling, etc., none has been proposed for the dietary component; thus this workshop focused on the latter specific point. It is important to foster rigor in design and reproducibility of published studies to maintain high quality and enable designs that can be compared in systematic reviews. Speakers addressed the influence of the structure of the fermentable carbohydrate on the microbiota and the variables to consider in design of studies using animals, in vitro models, and human subjects. For all types of studies, strengths and weaknesses of various designs were highlighted, and for human studies, comparisons between controlled feeding and observational designs were discussed. Because of the lack of published, best-diet formulations for specific research questions, the main recommendation is to describe dietary ingredients and treatments in as much detail as possible to allow reproduction by other scientists.

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 · 10.1152/ajpendo.00058.2018

Cites

44 of 44 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?

  • Isolating associations of specific dietary components from other factors affecting the gut microbiota in observational human cohorts is challenging.

    “however, this is not unexpected given the known challenges of isolating associations of specific dietary components from other factors known to affect the gut microbiota in observational human cohorts (33, 34).”

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
Klurfeld, D. M., Davis, C. D., Karp, R. W., Allen-Vercoe, E., Chang, E. B., Chassaing, B., Fahey, G. C., Hamaker, B. R., Holscher, H. D., Lampe, J. W., Marette, A., Martens, E., O’Keefe, S. J., Rose, D. J., Saarela, M., Schneeman, B. O., Slavin, J. L., Sonnenburg, J. L., Swanson, K. S., Wu, G. D., & Lynch, C. J.
Affiliations
  • Agricultural Research Service (US)
  • National Institutes of Health (US)
  • Department of Molecular and Cellular Biology, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario, Canada
  • University of Chicago (US)
  • Institute for Biomedical Sciences, Georgia State University, Atlanta, Georgia
  • Department of Animal Sciences, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, Illinois
  • Purdue University West Lafayette (US)
  • University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign (US)
  • Fred Hutch Cancer Center (US)
  • Heart and Lung Institute, Laval University, Québec City, Québec, Canada
  • University of Michigan (US)
  • University of Pittsburgh (US)
  • University of Nebraska–Lincoln (US)
  • VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland (FI)
  • University of California, Davis (US)
  • University of Minnesota (US)
  • Stanford University (US)
  • University of Pennsylvania (US)
Corresponding author
Klurfeld, David M.
Venue
American Journal of Physiology-Endocrinology and Metabolism
Published
2018-12-01
Volume
315
Issue
6
Pages
E1087-E1097
ISSN
  • 0193-1849 (ISSN-L)
  • 1522-1555
OpenAlex
W2888147176
Cited by
61
References
44
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 2
FWCI
2.67
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • American Journal of Physiology-Endocrinology and Metabolism (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Lincoln (University of Nebraska) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Cancer Institute (R01CA204403)
  • National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (R01DK101674, R01DK085025)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Gut microbiota and health
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Food composition and properties
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Microbial Metabolites in Food Biotechnology
Keywords
dietary fiber, gut microbiota, colonic microbiota, food components, research design, reproducibility, controlled feeding, observational studies, in vitro model, animal models, fermentable carbohydrates, best practices
MeSH terms
Gastrointestinal Microbiome, Animals, Diet, Dietary Fiber, Humans, Nutritional Status, Research Design, Models, Animal

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