Background Comparing the health impacts of sustainable dietary patterns is challenging due to varying definitions and assessment methods across studies. We aimed to identify, summarise, and discuss these definitions and identify their associated quantitative health impacts. Methods The search was conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus on November 24th, 2023. Papers published since 1986, that focused on general human populations, defined sustainable dietary patterns, and quantified associated health impacts were included. Results We identified 10,051 unique studies of which 97 were included. Most studies were conducted only in high-income countries (80%) and nearly 80% were published after 2019. About half of the included studies used predictive modelling to estimate health impacts (44%) and among these, most risk-outcome data came from Global Burden of Disease studies (44%). The EAT-Lancet planetary health diet emerged as the most common dietary pattern definition (29%). Conclusions Our review highlights a lack of consistency in sustainable dietary pattern definitions and a stark geographical disparity in investigations connecting sustainable eating to health outcomes. Along with the lack of standard epidemiological data sources for predictive health impact modelling, these findings complicate cross-study comparisons and underscore the need for harmonised definitions and standard data sources to better understand the implications of sustainable diets globally. Trial registration Open Science Framework— https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/AJN3Y
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jacob et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: