Cited by 141Gut microbiota and healthNutritional Studies and DietNutrition, Genetics, and Disease

Use of dietary indices to control for diet in human gut microbiota studies

Open access
Bowyer, Ruth C. E., Jackson, Matthew A., Pallister, Tess, Skinner, Jane, Spector, Tim D., Welch, Ailsa A., Steves, Claire J.·2018·Microbiome

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Environmental factors have a large influence on the composition of the human gut microbiota. One of the most influential and well-studied is host diet. To assess and interpret the impact of non-dietary factors on the gut microbiota, we endeavoured to determine the most appropriate method to summarise community variation attributable to dietary effects. Dietary habits are multidimensional with internal correlations. This complexity can be simplified by using dietary indices that quantify dietary variance in a single measure and offer a means of controlling for diet in microbiota studies. However, to date, the applicability of different dietary indices to gut microbiota studies has not been assessed. Here, we use food frequency questionnaire (FFQ) data from members of the TwinsUK cohort to create three different dietary measures applicable in western-diet populations: The Healthy Eating Index (HEI), the Mediterranean Diet Score (MDS) and the Healthy Food Diversity index (HFD-Index). We validate and compare these three indices to determine which best summarises dietary influences on gut microbiota composition. RESULTS: All three indices were independently validated using established measures of health, and all were significantly associated with microbiota measures; the HEI had the highest t values in models of alpha diversity measures, and had the highest number of associations with microbial taxa. Beta diversity analyses showed the HEI explained the greatest variance of microbiota composition. In paired tests between twins discordant for dietary index score, the HEI was associated with the greatest variation of taxa and twin dissimilarity. CONCLUSIONS: We find that the HEI explains the most variance in, and has the strongest association with, gut microbiota composition in a western (UK) population, suggesting that it may be the best summary measure to capture gut microbiota variance attributable to habitual diet in comparable populations.

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 · 10.1186/s40168-018-0455-y

Cites

57 of 57 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?

  • Bowyer et al. found that the Healthy Eating Index (HEI) explained the most variance between diet and the microbiome across three indices, with the strongest association with gut microbial composition than the other measures.

    “The dietary index Healthy Eating Index (HEI) explained the most variance between diet and the microbiome across the three indices, with the strongest association with gut microbial composition than the other measures [91].”

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
Bowyer, R. C. E., Jackson, M. A., Pallister, T., Skinner, J., Spector, T. D., Welch, A. A., & Steves, C. J.
Affiliations
  • St Thomas' Hospital (GB)
  • University of East Anglia (GB)
Corresponding author
Steves, Claire J.
Venue
Microbiome
Published
2018-04-25
Volume
6
Issue
1
Pages
77-77
ISSN
2049-2618 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2802332168
Cited by
140
References
57
Citations by year
2026: 19 · 2025: 17 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 23 · 2021: 26 · 2020: 22 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 3
FWCI
5.84
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Microbiome (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UEA Digital Repository (University of East Anglia) (acceptedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • Wellcome Trust (WT081878MA)
  • Kings College London
  • Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust
  • University of East Anglia
  • Chronic Disease Research Foundation (CDRF/10/06/2014)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Gut microbiota and health
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Nutritional Studies and Diet
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Nutrition, Genetics, and Disease
Keywords
dietary indices, gut microbiota, Healthy Eating Index, Mediterranean diet score, food frequency questionnaire, alpha diversity, beta diversity, twin discordance, Western diet, microbiota composition
MeSH terms
Gastrointestinal Microbiome, Diet, Healthy, Diet, Feeding Behavior, Humans, Reproducibility of Results, Biodiversity

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