Unknown

Dataset Information

0

Comparison of Nutrigenomics Technology Interface Tools for Consumers and Health Professionals: Protocol for a Mixed-Methods Study.


ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Although nutrition interventions are a widely accepted resource for the prevention of long-term health conditions, current approaches have not adequately reduced chronic disease morbidity. Nutrigenomics has great potential; however, it is complicated to implement. There is a need for products based on nutrition-related gene test results that are easily understood, accessible, and used. OBJECTIVE:The primary objective of this study was to compare a nonpractitioner-assisted direct-to-consumer self-driven approach to nutrigenomics versus an integrated and personalized practitioner-led method. METHODS:This 4-month study used a mixed-methods design that included (1) a phase 1 randomized controlled trial that examined the effectiveness of a multifaceted, nutrition-based gene test (components assessed included major nutrients, food tolerances, food taste and preferences, and micronutrients) in changing health behaviors, followed by (2) a qualitative investigation that explored participants' experiences. The study recruited 55 healthy males and females (aged 35-55 years) randomized as a 2:1 ratio where 36 received the intervention (gene test results plus integrated and personalized nutrition report) and 19 were assigned to the control group (gene test results report emailed). The primary outcomes of interest measures included changes in diet (nutrients, healthy eating index), changes in measures on General Self-efficacy and Health-Related Quality of Life scales, and anthropometrics (body mass index, waist-to-hip ratio) measured at baseline, post intervention (3 and 6 weeks), and the final visit (week 9 post intervention). RESULTS:Of the 478 individuals who expressed interest, 180 were invited (37.7%, 180/478) and completed the eligibility screening questionnaire; 73 of the 180 invited individuals (40.5%) were deemed eligible. Of the 73 individuals who were deemed to be eligible, 58 completed the baseline health questionnaire and food records (79%). Of these 58 individuals, 3 were excluded either because they did not complete all required data collection forms or were later found to be ineligible. The final sample (n=55) was mostly female (75%), married (85%), and those who had completed postsecondary education (62%). CONCLUSIONS:This study will leverage quantitative and qualitative findings, which will guide the development of nutrigenomics-based products in electronic formats that are user-friendly for consumers and health professionals. Although the quantitative data have not been analyzed yet, the overwhelming interest in the study and the extremely high retention rate show that there is a great degree of interest in this field. Given this interest and the fact that nutrigenomics is an evolving science, a need for continued research exists to further the understanding of the role of genetic variation and its role and applications in nutrition practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION:Clinicaltrials.gov NCT03310814; http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03310814 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6yGnU5deB). REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER:RR1-10.2196/9846.

SUBMITTER: Littlejohn P 

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6018240 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

altmetric image

Publications

Comparison of Nutrigenomics Technology Interface Tools for Consumers and Health Professionals: Protocol for a Mixed-Methods Study.

Littlejohn Paula P   Cop Irene I   Brown Erin E   Afroze Rimi R   Davison Karen M KM  

JMIR research protocols 20180611 6


<h4>Background</h4>Although nutrition interventions are a widely accepted resource for the prevention of long-term health conditions, current approaches have not adequately reduced chronic disease morbidity. Nutrigenomics has great potential; however, it is complicated to implement. There is a need for products based on nutrition-related gene test results that are easily understood, accessible, and used.<h4>Objective</h4>The primary objective of this study was to compare a nonpractitioner-assist  ...[more]

Similar Datasets

| S-EPMC6536824 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC6977326 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC6891827 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC5037878 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC8204153 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC7397979 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC5966916 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC5974459 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC10195495 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC5577903 | biostudies-other