title: Are research papers reporting results from nutrigenetics clinical research a potential source of biohype?
abstract: 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.
authors.affiliation: Bioethics Programs, Department of Social and Preventive Medicine, Faculty of medicine, University of Montréal, Montréal, Quebec, Canada.
authors.forename: R
authors.initials: R
authors.lastname: Stenne
authors.forename: T
authors.initials: T
authors.lastname: Hurlimann
authors.forename: Béatrice
authors.initials: B
authors.lastname: Godard
mesh_terms: D035843:Biomedical Research / Q000941:ethics*; D032984:Ethics, Research; D019317:Evidence-Based Medicine / Q000941:ethics*; D006801:Humans; D054647:Nutrigenomics / Q000941:ethics*; D011643:Publishing / Q000941:ethics*