Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Nutrigenetics is a promising field, but the achievability of expected benefits is challenged by the methodological limitations that are associated with clinical research in that field. The mere existence of these limitations suggests that promises about potential outcomes may be premature. Thus, benefits claimed in scientific journal articles in which these limitations are not acknowledged might stimulate biohype. This article aims to examine whether nutrigenetics clinical research articles are a potential source of biohype. Of the 173 articles identified, 16 contained claims in which clinical applications were extrapolated from study results. The methodological limitations being incompletely acknowledged, these articles could potentially be a source of biohype.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Stenne et al. (2012) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: