Search

Objectives: The aim was to systematically review the associations among white meat consumption, cardiovascular diseases (CVD), and type 2 diabetes (T2D)., Methods: Databases MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Scopus were searched (15th October 2021) for randomized intervention trials (RCTs, ≥ 4 weeks of duration) and prospective cohort studies (≥12 month of follow-up) assessing the consumption of white meat as the intervention/exposure. Eligible outcomes for RCTs were cardiometabolic risk factors and for cohorts, fatal and non-fatal CVD and incident T2D. Risk of bias was estimated using the Cochrane's RoB2 and Risk of Bias for Nutrition Observational Studies . Meta-analysis was conducted in case of ≥3 relevant intervention studies or ≥5 cohort studies using random-effects models. The strength of evidence was evaluated using the World Cancer Research Fund's criteria., Results: The literature search yielded 5,795 scientific articles, and after screening 43 full-text articles, 23 cohort studies and three intervention studies were included. All included intervention studies matched fat content of intervention and control diets, and none of them showed any significant effects on the selected outcomes of white meat when compared to red meat. Findings from the cohort studies generally did not support any associations between white meat intake and outcomes. Meta-analyses were conducted for CVD mortality (RR: 0.95, 95% CI: 0.87-1.02, P = 0.23, I 2 = 25%) and T2D incidence (RR: 0.98, 95% CI: 0.87-1.11, P = 0.81, I 2 = 82%)., Conclusion: The currently available evidence does not indicate a role, beneficial or detrimental, of white meat consumption for CVD and T2D. Future studies investigating potentially different health effects of processed versus unprocessed white meat and substitution of red meat with white meat are warranted. Registration: Prospero registration CRD42022295915., Competing Interests: Funding was received from the Nordic Council of Ministers and governmental food and health authorities of Norway, Finland, Sweden, Denmark, and Iceland. The authors declare no potential conflicts of interest., (© 2023 Alfons Ramel et al.)

Copper functions as a structural component in many proteins involved in energy and iron metabolism, production of neurotransmitters, formation of connective tissue and endogenous antioxidant defence. Several biochemical indices have been suggested and used to assess copper status, but none of these has been found suitable for the detection of marginal copper deficiency or marginal copper toxicity. Copper imbalances have been linked to the pathogenesis of several chronic inflammatory diseases. During the last decade, a number of meta-analyses and systematic reviews have been published shedding light on the association between copper imbalances and some of these pathologies. Most of these meta-analyses are based on case-control studies. All show that blood copper concentrations are higher in cases than in controls, but there is inconclusive evidence to change the recommendations., Competing Interests: The authors have not received any funding or benefits from industry or elsewhere to conduct this study., (© 2023 Christine Henriksen and Erik Kristoffer Arnesen.)

Objective: To systematically review the evidence for whether habitual or different levels of experimental intake of vitamin B12 from diet and supplements is sufficient to ensure adequate B12 status in groups most susceptible to vitamin B12 deficiency., Methods: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Scopus up to 21 May 2021, for intervention studies, prospective cohort studies and case-control studies assessing B12 intake from diet and/or supplements in relation to B12 status (s/p-B12, holotranscobalamin, methylmalonic acid, homocysteine or breastmilk B12). Cross-sectional studies were eligible for studies conducted during pregnancy and lactation. Included populations were children (0-18 years), young adults (18-35 years), pregnant or lactating women, older adults (≥65 years) and vegans or vegetarians. Study selection, data extraction and risk of bias assessment were conducted by two assessors independently. The evidence was synthesized qualitatively and classified according to the World Cancer Research Fund., Results: The searches yielded 4855 articles of which 89 were assessed in full text and 18 included. Three studies were conducted during pregnancy and three during lactation or infancy - all observational. Eight studies were conducted among older adults; most were interventions among B12-deficient participants. Four studies were eligible for vegetarian and vegans, all interventions. The strength of evidence that habitual B12 intake or an intake in line with the current Nordic recommended intake (RI) is sufficient to ensure adequate status was considered Limited - no conclusion for all included populations., Conclusion: Evidence is insufficient to assess if or which level of B12 intake is sufficient to maintain adequate status for all included populations. Population-based cohort studies and low-to-moderate dose interventions that address this question are highly warranted., Competing Interests: The authors declare no potential conflicts of interest. Funding was received from the Nordic Council of Ministers and governmental food and health authorities of Norway, Finland, Sweden, Denmark and Iceland., (© 2023 Bärebring et al.)

Objectives: This study aimed to systematically review the evidence for associations between consumption of legumes and cardiovascular disease (CVD), type 2 diabetes (T2D) and their risk factors among healthy adults., Methods: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Scopus up to 16 May 2022 for ≥4 weeks long randomized (RCT) and non-randomized controlled trials and prospective cohort studies with follow-up ≥12 months, assessing legume intake (beans/lentils/peas/soybeans, excluding peanuts and legume-products/protein/powder/flour) as the intervention or exposure. Outcomes were CVD, coronary heart disease (CHD), stroke, T2D and in intervention trials only: changes in blood lipids, glycemic markers, and blood pressure. Risk of bias (RoB) was evaluated with Cochrane's RoB2, ROBINS-I, and US Department of Agriculture (USDA)'s RoB-NObS. Effect sizes were pooled using random-effects meta-analyses and expressed as relative risk or weighed mean differences with 95% confidence intervals, heterogeneity quantified as I 2 . The evidence was appraised according to World Cancer Research Fund's criteria., Results: Of the 181 full-text articles assessed for eligibility, 47 were included: 31 cohort studies (2,081,432 participants with generally low legume consumption), 14 crossover RCTs (448 participants), one parallel RCT and one non-randomized trial. Meta-analyses of cohort studies were suggestive of null associations for CVD, CHD, stroke and T2D. Meta-analyses of RCTs suggested a protective effect on total cholesterol (mean difference -0.22 mmol/L), low density lipoprotein (LDL)-cholesterol (-0.19 mmol/L), fasting glucose (-0.19 mmol/L), and HOMA-IR (-0.30). Heterogeneity was high ( I 2 = 52% for LDL-cholesterol, >75% for others). The overall evidence for associations between consumption of legumes and risk of CVD and T2D was considered limited - no conclusion ., Conclusion: Legume consumption was not found to influence risk of CVD and T2D in healthy adult populations with generally low legume consumption. However, protective effects on risk factors, seen in RCTs, lend some support for recommending legume consumption as part of diverse and healthy dietary patterns for prevention of CVD and T2D., Competing Interests: The authors declare no potential conflict of interest. Partial funding was received from the Nordic Council of Ministers and governmental food and health authorities of Norway, Finland, Sweden, Denmark, and Iceland., (© 2023 Birna Thorisdottir et al.)

Objectives: To systematically review the evidence on the effect of replacing the intake of animal protein with plant protein on cardiovascular disease (CVD) and type 2 diabetes (T2D) and their intermediate risk factors., Methods: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Scopus up to 12th May 2022 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or prospective cohort studies that investigated replacement of animal protein with plant protein from foods. Outcomes were CVDs, T2D, and in RCTs also the effects on blood lipids, glycemic markers, and blood pressure. Risk of bias was evaluated with the Cochrane's RoB2, ROBINS-I, and USDA's RoB-NObS tools. Random-effects meta-analyses assessed the effects of plant vs. animal proteins on blood lipids in RCTs. The evidence was appraised according to the World Cancer Research Fund's criteria., Results: After screening 15,090 titles/abstracts, full text of 124 papers was scrutinized in detail, from which 13 RCTs and seven cohort studies were included. Eight of the RCTs had either some concern or high risk of bias, while the corresponding evaluation of cohort studies resulted in moderate risk of bias for all seven. Meta-analyses of RCTs suggested a protective effect on total cholesterol (mean difference -0.11 mmol/L; 95% CI -0.22, -0.01) and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (-0.14 mmol/L; 95% CI -0.25, -0.02) by replacing animal protein with plant protein. The substitution of animal protein with plant protein (percentage of energy intake) in cohort studies was associated with lower CVD mortality ( n = 4) and lower T2D incidence ( n = 2). The evidence was considered limited-suggestive for both outcomes., Conclusion: Evidence that the substitution of animal protein with plant protein reduces risk of both CVD mortality and T2D incidence is limited-suggestive . Replacing animal protein with plant protein for aspects of sustainability may also be a public health strategy to lower the risk of CVD mortality and T2D., Competing Interests: Funding was received from the Nordic Council of Ministers and governmental food and health authorities of Norway, Finland, Sweden, Denmark, and Iceland. The authors declare no conflicts of interest., (© 2023 Christel Lamberg-Allardt et al.)

Background: While dietary fiber intake is low in many children, the current trend to plant-based diets is associated with higher fiber intake in children raised on these diets. As older reports indicate that diets providing high fiber intake in children 0-5 years may affect growth, iron status and bowel function, we summarized the available evidence in this systematic review., Objective: To identify, critically appraise, and synthesize evidence on the effect of high fiber intake on growth, iron and bowel function in children 0-5 years, with relevance to the Nordic and Baltic countries., Methods: Following a pre-registered protocol, we searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central of Controlled Trials, and Scopus for clinical trials and prospective cohort studies published until November 2021. Two reviewers independently screened retrieved literature, extracted relevant data, and performed risk of bias assessment. Outcomes were growth, iron metabolism and bowel function in children 0-5 years. We narratively described findings from studies that met inclusion criteria., Results: From 5,644 identified records, five articles met the inclusion criteria. Two RCTs had an overall moderate risk of bias, while the three observational studies had serious risk. Overall, we found no robust association between high intake of dietary fiber and growth. In the RCTs, higher intake of fiber had a positive effect on bowel movements and constipation. No studies on fiber intake and iron status were identified.The certainty of the overall evidence was inconclusive for growth and bowel function, while no assessment was made for iron status., Conclusion: We found no clear association between high intake of dietary fiber and growth or bowel function in young children living in affluent countries, albeit with only a limited number of studies. There is a lack of studies investigating health effects of high fiber intake in small children., Competing Interests: Funding was received from the Nordic Council of Ministers and governmental food and health authorities of Norway, Finland, Sweden, Denmark, and Iceland., (© 2023 Jutta Dierkes et al.)

Objectives: We aimed to systematically review studies and evaluate the strength of the evidence on nuts/seeds consumption and cardiometabolic diseases and their risk factors among adults., Methods: A protocol was pre-registered in PROSPERO (CRD42021270554). We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Scopus up to September 20, 2021 for prospective cohort studies and ≥12-week randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Main outcomes were cardiovascular disease (CVD), coronary heart disease (CHD), stroke and type 2 diabetes (T2D), secondary total-/low density lipoprotein (LDL)-cholesterol, blood pressure and glycaemic markers. Data extraction and risk of bias (RoB) assessments (using RoB 2.0 and RoB-NObS) were performed in duplicate. Effect sizes were pooled using random-effects meta-analyses and expressed as relative risk (RR) or weighted mean differences with 95% confidence intervals (CI); heterogeneity quantified as I 2 . One-stage dose-response analyses assessed the linear and non-linear associations with CVD, CHD, stroke and T2D. The strength of evidence was classified per the World Cancer Research Fund criteria., Results: After screening 23,244 references, we included 42 papers from cohort studies (28 unique cohorts, 1,890,573 participants) and 18 RCTs (2,266 participants). In the cohorts, mainly populations with low consumption, high versus low total nuts/seeds consumption was inversely associated with total CVD (RR 0.81; 95% CI 0.75, 0.86; I 2 = 67%), CVD mortality (0.77; 0.72, 0.82; I 2 = 59.3%), CHD (0.82; 0.76, 0.89; I 2 = 64%), CHD mortality (0.75; 0.65, 0.87; I 2 = 66.9%) and non-fatal CHD (0.85; 0.75, 0.96; I 2 = 62.2%). According to the non-linear dose-response analyses, consumption of 30 g/day of total nuts/seeds was associated with RRs of similar magnitude. For stroke and T2D the summary RR for high versus low intake was 0.91 (95% CI 0.85, 0.97; I 2 = 24.8%) and 0.95 (0.75, 1.21; I 2 = 82.2%). Intake of nuts (median ~50 g/day) lowered total (-0.15 mmol/L; -0.22, -0.08; I 2 = 31.2%) and LDL-cholesterol (-0.13 mmol/L; -0.21, -0.05; I 2 = 68.6%), but not blood pressure. Findings on fasting glucose, HbA1c and insulin resistance were conflicting. The results were robust to sensitivity and subgroup analyses. We rated the associations between nuts/seeds and both CVD and CHD as probable . There was limited but suggestive evidence for no association with stroke. No conclusion could be made for T2D., Conclusion: There is a probable relationship between consumption of nuts/seeds and lower risk of CVD, mostly driven by CHD, possibly in part through effects on blood lipids. More research on stroke and T2D may affect the conclusions. The evidence of specific nuts should be further investigated., Competing Interests: The authors declare no potential conflicts of interest. Partial funding was received from the Nordic Council of Ministers and governmental food and health authorities of Norway, Finland, Sweden, Denmark, and Iceland., (© 2023 Erik Kristoffer Arnesen et al.)

Objective: To assess whether supplementation with long chain n-3 fatty acids during pregnancy, lactation, or infancy reduces the risk of developing asthma or atopic disease during childhood., Methods: Searches were performed in MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Scopus up to 2021-09-20, for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that investigated the effect of supplemental long chain n-3 fatty acids during pregnancy, lactation, or infancy for the prevention of childhood asthma or allergy. Article selection, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment (Cochrane's Risk of Bias 2.0) were independently conducted by two assessors. The evidence was synthesized qualitatively according to the criteria of the World Cancer Research Fund and meta-analyzed., Results: A total of nine RCTs met inclusion criteria; six were conducted during pregnancy, two during infancy, and one during both pregnancy and infancy. Meta-analysis showed that long chain n-3 fatty acid supplementation during pregnancy significantly reduced the risk of asthma/wheeze in the child (RR 0.62 [95% confidence interval 0.34-0.91], P = 0.005, I 2 = 67.4%), but not other outcomes. Supplementation during lactation of infancy showed no effects on any outcome. The strength of evidence that long chain n-3 fatty acid supplementation during pregnancy reduces risk of asthma/wheeze in the offspring was considered limited - suggestive . No conclusion could be made for the effects of long chain n-3 fatty acid supplementation during pregnancy for other atopic diseases, or for supplementation during lactation or infancy for any outcome., Conclusion: The intake of long chain n-3 fatty acid supplements during pregnancy may reduce the risk of asthma and/or wheeze in the offspring, but the strength of evidence is low. There is inconclusive evidence for the effects of long chain n-3 fatty acid supplements during pregnancy for other outcomes, as well as for supplementation during lactation or infancy., Competing Interests: Funding was received from the Nordic Council of Ministers and governmental food and health authorities of Norway, Finland, Sweden, Denmark, and Iceland. The authors declare no potential conflicts of interest., (© 2022 Linnea Bärebring et al.)

Objective: To identify, critically appraise, and synthesize evidence on the effect of quality of dietary fat intake and different classes of fatty acids on the risk of Alzheimer's disease (AD) and dementia in adults aged ≥50 years., Methods: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central of Controlled Trials, and Scopus for clinical trials and prospective cohort studies published until May 2021. Two reviewers independently screened retrieved literature, extracted relevant data, and performed risk of bias assessment. Classes of fatty acids included were saturated fatty acids (SFAs), trans fatty acids (TFAs), monounsaturated fatty acids (MUFAs), poly-unsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs), and their subtypes and sources. Given between-study heterogeneity, we did not perform meta-analyses but narratively described findings from the studies., Results: From 4,491 identified records, five articles (based on four prospective cohort studies) met the inclusion criteria. Three studies had an overall serious risk of bias, while one study had a moderate risk. Overall, we found no robust association between intake of any fatty acids type and the development of AD and dementia. For example, for SFA and TFA, there was contradictory associations reported on AD: one study found that each unit increase in energy-adjusted intake of SFA (risk ratio [RR] 0.83, 95%CI 0.70-0.98) and TFA (RR 0.80, 95%CI 0.65-0.97) was associated with a decreased risk of AD, but not dementia. For PUFA, one study found that higher quintile intake of marine-based n-3 PUFA was associated with a decreased risk of AD. The intake of other fatty acids was not associated with the outcomes. The certainty of the overall evidence was inconclusive., Conclusion: We found no clear association between the intake of various classes of fatty acids and the risk of AD and dementia in adults. More well-designed prospective studies are required to clarify these findings., (© 2022 Bright I. Nwaru et al.)

Objectives: The aim of this study was to examine the evidence for an association between the dietary protein intake in children and the growth and risk of overweight or obesity up to 18 years of age in settings relevant for the Nordic countries., Methods: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Scopus up to February 26, 2021 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or prospective cohort studies assessing for protein intake from foods (total and from different sources) in children. The outcomes include weight, height/length, adiposity indices, and/or risk of overweight and/or obesity. The risk of bias was evaluated with instruments for each respective design (Cochrane's Risk of Bias 2.0 and RoB-NObS). A meta-analysis of five cohort studies was performed. The evidence was classified according to the criteria of the World Cancer Research Fund., Results: The literature search resulted in 9,132 abstracts, of which 55 papers were identified as potentially relevant. In total, 21 studies from 27 publications were included, of which five were RCTs and 16 were cohort studies. The RCTs found generally null effects of high-protein intake in infants on weight gain, nor that lower protein diets negatively affected growth. All included RCTs had some concern regarding the risk of bias and were limited by small sample sizes. Total protein intake and BMI were assessed in 12 cohorts, of which 11 found positive associations. The meta-analysis revealed a pooled effect estimate of 0.06 (95% CI 0.03, 0.1) kg/m 2 BMI per one E% increment in total protein ( I 2 = 15.5). Therefore, the evidence for a positive relationship between total protein intake and BMI was considered probable . Furthermore, there was probable evidence for an association between higher intake of animal protein and increased BMI. There was limited, suggestive evidence for an effect of total protein intake and higher risk of overweight and/or obesity, while no conclusions could be made on the associations between animal vs. plant protein intake and risk of overweight and/or obesity., Discussion: In healthy, well-nourished children of Western populations, there is probably a causal relationship between a high-protein intake in early childhood (≤ 18 months) - particularly protein of animal origin - and higher BMI later in childhood, with consistent findings across cohort studies. A lack of RCTs precluded a stronger grading of the evidence., Competing Interests: The authors declare no potential conflicts of interest. Partial funding was received from the Nordic Council of Ministers and governmental food and health authorities of Norway, Finland, Sweden, Denmark, and Iceland., (© 2022 Erik Kristoffer Arnesen et al.)

Background: As part of the process of updating national dietary reference values (DRVs) and food-based dietary guidelines (FBDGs), the Nordic Nutrition Recommendations 2022 project (NNR2022) will select a limited number of topics for systematic reviews (SRs)., Objective: To develop and transparently describe the results of a procedure for prioritisation of topics that may be submitted for SRs in the NNR2022 project., Design: In an open call, scientists, health professionals, national food and health authorities, food manufacturers, other stakeholders and the general population in the Nordic and Baltic countries were invited to suggest SR topics. The NNR2022 Committee developed scoping reviews (ScRs) for 51 nutrients and food groups aimed at identifying potential SR topics. These ScRs included the relevant nominations from the open call. SR topics were categorised, ranked and prioritised by the NNR2022 Committee in a modified Delphi process. Existing qualified SRs were identified to omit duplication., Results: A total of 45 nominations with suggestion for more than 200 exposure-outcome pairs were received in the public call. A number of additional topics were identified in ScRs. In order to omit duplication with recently qualified SRs, we defined criteria and identified 76 qualified SRs. The NNR2022 Committee subsequently shortlisted 52 PI/ECOTSS statements, none of which overlapped with the qualified SRs. The PI/ECOTSS statements were then graded 'High' ( n = 21), 'Medium' ( n = 9) or 'Low' ( n = 22) importance, and the PI/ECOTSS statements with 'High' were ranked in a Delphi process. The nine top prioritised PI/ECOTSS included the following exposure-outcome pairs: 1) plant protein intake in children and body growth, 2) pulses/legumes intake, and cardiovascular disease and type 2 diabetes, 3) plant protein intake in adults, and atherosclerotic/cardiovascular disease and type 2 diabetes, 4) fat quality and mental health, 5) vitamin B 12 and vitamin B 12 status, 6) intake of white meat (no consumption vs. high consumption and white meat replaced with red meat), and all-cause mortality, type 2 diabetes and risk factors, 7) intake of n-3 LPUFAs from supplements during pregnancy, and asthma and allergies in the offspring, 8) nuts intake and cardiovascular disease (CVD) and type 2 diabetes in adults, 9) dietary fibre intake (high vs. low) in children and bowel function., Discussion: The selection of topics for de novo SRs is central in the NNR2022 project, as the results of these SRs may cause adjustment of existing DRVs and FBDGs. That is why we have developed this extensive process for the prioritisation of SR topics. For transparency, the results of the process are reported in this publication., Conclusion: The principles and methodologies developed in the NNR2022 project may serve as a framework for national health authorities or organisations when developing national DRVs and FBDGs. This collaboration between the food and health authorities in Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Iceland, Latvia, Lithuania, Norway and Sweden represents an international effort for harmonisation and sharing of resources and competence when developing national DRVs and FBDGs., Competing Interests: See sections on ‘Conflict of interest’ and ‘Sponsors of the NNR2022 project’ in the main text of the article by Christensen et al. (4)., (© 2021 Anne Høyer et al.)

Background: Qualified systematic reviews (SRs) will form the main basis for evaluating causal effects of nutrients or food groups on health outcomes in the sixth edition of Nordic Nutrition Recommendations to be published in 2022 (NNR2022)., Objective: To describe rationale and structure of SRs used in NNR2022., Design: The SR methodologies of the previous edition of NNR were used as a starting point. Methodologies of recent SRs commissioned by leading national food and health authorities or international food and health organizations were examined and scrutinized. Methodologies for developing SRs were agreed by the NNR2022 Committee in a consensus-driven process., Results: Qualified SRs will be developed by a cross-disciplinary group of experts and reported according to the requirements of the EQUATOR network. A number of additional requirements must also be fulfilled, including 1) a clearly stated set of objectives and research questions with pre-defined eligibility criteria for the studies, 2) an explicit, reproducible methodology, 3) a systematic search that attempts to identify all studies that would meet the eligibility criteria, 4) an assessment of the validity of the findings of the included studies through an assessment of 'risk of bias' of the studies, 5) a systematic presentation and synthesis of the characteristics and findings of the included studies, and 6) a grading of the overall evidence. The complete definition and requirements of a qualified SR are described., Discussion: Most SRs published in scientific journals do not fulfill all criteria of the qualified SRs in the NNR2022 project. This article discusses the structure and rationale for requirements of qualified SRs in NNR2022. National food and health authorities have only recently begun to use qualified SRs as a basis for nutrition recommendations., Conclusion: Qualified SRs will be used to inform dietary reference values (DRVs) and food-based dietary guidelines (FBDGs) in the NNR2022 project., (© 2020 Linlin Sun and Zhanjie Niu.)

Background: The Nordic Nutrition Recommendations (NNRs) constitute the scientific basis for national dietary reference values (DRVs) and food-based dietary guidelines (FBDGs) in the Nordic and Baltic countries., Objective: To define principles and methodologies for the sixth edition of NNR to be published in 2022 (NNR2022)., Design: The principles and methodologies of the previous edition of NNR were used as a starting point. Recent nutrition recommendations commissioned by other national food and health authorities or international food and health organizations were examined and dissected. Updated principles and methodologies were agreed by the NNR2022 Committee in a consensus-driven process., Results: An organizational model with 'checks and balances' was developed to minimize the influence of subjective biases of the committee members and experts. Individual chapters on all included nutrients and food groups will be updated as scoping reviews. Systematic reviews (SRs), which are the main basis for evaluating causal effects of nutrients or food groups on health outcomes, will be embedded in each chapter. A NNR SR Centre will be established for performing de novo SRs on prioritized topics. To avoid duplication and optimize the use of resources, qualified SRs commissioned by other national and international organizations and health authorities will also inform DRVs and FBDGs in NNR2022., Discussion: The evidence-based methods defined in the NNR2022 project are compatible with most contemporary methods used by leading national food and health authorities. Global harmonization of methodological approaches to nutrition recommendations is strongly encouraged., Conclusion: Evidence-informed principles and methodologies underpinned by SRs will ensure that DRVs and FBDGs defined in the NNR2022 project are based on the best available evidence and as far as possible free from overt bias., Competing Interests: See section on “Conflicts of interest” and “Sponsors of the NNR2022 project” in the main text above., (© 2020 Jacob Juel Christensen et al.)

Background: Systematic reviews (SRs) constitute a major part of the Nordic Nutrition Recommendations (NNRs). The step-by-step procedure used to develop SRs has evolved considerably over time and is often tailored to fit the exposure and outcomes in focus., Objective: To describe a detailed procedure for developing qualified SRs commissioned by the NNR2022 project., Design: Scrutinizing procedures of recent SRs commissioned by leading national food and health authorities or international food and health organizations., Results: The following eight steps must be included when developing qualified SRs for the NNR2022 project: 1) define research question, 2) protocol development, 3) literature search, 4) screening and selection of studies, 5) data extraction, 6) assessing risk of bias, 7) synthesis and grading of total strength of evidence, and 8) reporting according to certain standards., Discussion: This guide is based on the guidelines developed for the fifth edition of NNR but includes some important new domains in order to adhere to more recent, authoritative standards., Conclusion: All qualified SRs in the NNR2022 project will follow the protocol described here., Competing Interests: See sections on “Conflicts of interest” and “Sponsors of the NNR2022 project” in the main text of the companion article (1)., (© 2020 Erik Kristoffer Arnesen et al.)