Frequently asked questions about the Australian Dietary Guidelines review

On this page are frequently asked questions on:

• The general Dietary Guideline revision process
• Sustainability in the revision
• Newly commissioned evidence reviews
• Public call for evidence.

General revision process questions

Who will the revised Dietary Guidelines cover?

The revised Dietary Guidelines will be for people of all ages and backgrounds in the general population, including people with common diet-related risk factors such as being overweight or high blood pressure. They will not be for people who require specialised diets for treatment of disease or chronic conditions, but are aimed at preventing chronic conditions.

Dietary guidance for older adults, defined as the general population aged 65 years and older (or 50 years and older for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples), is an additional component of the Dietary Guidelines revision. This guidance is not intended for people with medical conditions that require specialised diets for managing disease or frailty. However, it is aimed at supporting prevention of malnutrition, frailty, falls and chronic conditions.

NHMRC recognised a change in language is required since the release of the 2013 Dietary Guidelines given many Australians have risk factors or live with chronic conditions. For this reason, we now refer to the general Australian population, not healthy Australians.

When will the draft Dietary Guidelines be open for public consultation and the final version published?

It is anticipated draft Dietary Guidelines will be open for public consultation in 2026. The revised Dietary Guidelines are anticipated to be published in late 2026.

A summary of the various stages and anticipated timelines are available at Guideline development.

To receive notifications when stakeholder consultation opportunities are open, and other updates related to the review, we encourage you to subscribe to our contact list.

How have we got to this point?

The Dietary Guidelines Expert Committee identified priority diet and nutrition topics for review based on detailed scoping and consultation. Research questions were then identified as high priority for evidence review based on public health and wellbeing considerations and the likelihood of significant new evidence having emerged since the development of the 2013 Dietary Guidelines. This process is detailed in the 2 Prioritisation Process Reports – one for older Australians and one for the other populations.

Evidence mapping activities have identified existing, high-quality systematic reviews to update the evidence for some of the priority research questions. Where important evidence gaps remain, the Expert Committee has requested 8 new evidence reviews be commissioned.

Topics identified as not requiring a full evidence update have not been excluded. They will be considered using:

• existing evidence from the 2013 Dietary Guidelines where the evidence underpinning recommendations is not likely to have changed significantly since their release
• systematic reviews published by recognised international groups.

For information about the work to date, timelines and how to get involved, visit About the review.

What role have consumers had and will have in the process?

The Dietary Guidelines Expert Committee identified priority diet and nutrition topics for evidence review based on detailed scoping and consultation. All stakeholders, including consumers, had the opportunity to inform the priority topics through the stakeholder survey.

All stakeholders, including consumers, will have the opportunity to comment on the draft guidelines.

NHMRC is considering options to further engage consumers and consumer groups during the development of the draft guidelines. To receive notifications when consultation opportunities are open, and other updates related to the review, we encourage you to subscribe to our contact list.

Have industry bodies been excluded from the process?

The Dietary Guidelines Expert Committee identified priority diet and nutrition topics for evidence review based on detailed scoping and consultation. All stakeholders had the opportunity to inform the priority topics through the stakeholder survey. The food industry is not represented on the Expert Committee.

Following Dietary Guidelines Governance Committee consideration in May 2024, individuals with links to industry were eligible for the Dietary Guidelines Sustainability Working Group, particularly given the call for expertise in agriculture, food manufacturing and environmental science. Appointment to the Working Group was dependent on the combination of the expertise individuals brought and all actual and potential conflicts of interests they declare.

To make the guidelines as trustworthy as possible, it was important to minimise or eliminate conflicts of interest on the Expert Committee and Working Group.

The food industry has an important role to play, particularly given its knowledge of food manufacturing and consumer purchasing patterns and to support implementation of the guidelines. Like other stakeholders, industry will have further opportunities to input into the revision of the Dietary Guidelines including:

• submitting potentially relevant systematic reviews and primary studies during public calls for evidence
• commenting on the draft guidelines.

How is guidance about Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people being addressed?

A targeted consultation survey of organisations working with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people was part of the early scoping work. It asked about their use of the 2013 Dietary Guidelines and companion resources. It also asked for suggestions about how the updated Dietary Guidelines could be improved to assist in promoting the health of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people.

Evidence about Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people and diet is being collected for some of the research questions as part of the evidence review. Where relevant and methodologically robust evidence is found it will be used to inform the Dietary Guidelines revision.

The Dietary Guidelines Expert Committee includes member/s of Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander descent.

How will cultural factors related to diet be addressed?

Cultural factors will be addressed in some research questions about the influence of the eating environment and the barriers and enablers to consumption aligned with guidelines.

Culturally and linguistically diverse groups are included as a population subgroup for these research questions. Where relevant and methodologically robust evidence is found it will be used to inform the Dietary Guidelines revision.

How will dietary guidance across different stages of life be addressed?

Information on adults, children/adolescents, women who are pregnant or breastfeeding and older adults will be considered. Where relevant and methodologically robust evidence for these groups is found it will be used to inform the Dietary Guidelines revision.

The research questions are broadly the same for all populations, as the diet considerations are similar, but the outcomes of interest are slightly different. Contextual factors, and barriers to eating in line with the Dietary Guidelines, at different life stages may also differ. See the full list of research questions.

Information about infant feeding is covered by the NHMRC Infant Feeding Guidelines and is outside the scope of this review.

How will the evidence on salt and alcohol intake be addressed?

Information about salt and alcohol intake and health outcomes will be informed by existing NHMRC evidence reviews and recommendations.

How will physical activity be addressed?

Information about physical activity will be addressed based on the National Physical Activity Guidelines.

Will the Dietary Guidelines include guidance for people living in aged care?

Dietary guidance for older adults will cover the general population aged 65 years and older (or 50 years and older for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples).

The guidance is not intended for people who require specialised diets for treatment of disease or frailty, but is aimed at preventing malnutrition, frailty, falls and chronic conditions. This may include people living in residential aged care who do not require specialised diets.

The Dietary Guidelines are already used by consumers, clinicians, educators, governments and industry as an important source of advice for decisions about food in institutions including residential care. We expect that this will continue with the revised Dietary Guidelines.

Residential aged care providers are required to meet the Aged Care Quality Standards, including that meals are of varied and suitable quality and quantity. For more information on the Aged Care Quality Standards visit the Aged Care Quality and Safety Commission.

Will the Dietary Guidelines include guidance for hospital inpatients?

The Dietary Guidelines are already used by consumers, clinicians, educators, governments and industry as an important source of advice for decisions about food in institutions. We expect that this will continue with the revised Dietary Guidelines.

Food is part of the care that is provided to patients who are admitted to hospital. It is informed by the Dietary Guidelines but also by the Australian Commission on Safety and Quality in Health Care Comprehensive Care Standards and the clinical needs of the patient.

Why aren't you looking at management of common chronic diseases?

The Australian Dietary Guidelines provide advice for people of all ages and backgrounds in the general population. They provide advice on foods, food groups and dietary patterns to improve health and wellbeing and reduce risk of diet-related chronic conditions. This includes prevention of common conditions such as, obesity, diabetes, cardiovascular disease and cancer.

In exploring the evidence base for high priority research areas, the impact of consuming different dietary patterns, sources of protein-rich foods and ultra-processed foods on key health outcomes is being considered. Development of obesity, diabetes, cardiovascular disease and cancer are included in the list of key health outcomes for all these priority areas. Details of the priority topics and health outcomes being considered are available on Priority research questions.

The provision of specific dietary guidance for people with chronic conditions, such diabetes, cardiovascular disease or cancer is outside the scope of the revision. Advice on therapeutic diets to manage or treat chronic conditions should be provided by a healthcare provider and is best included in clinical practice guidelines.

What is the implementation plan once the Dietary Guidelines are finalised?

The Department of Health, Disability and Ageing is responsible for the implementation of the Dietary Guidelines.

Requirements to inform implementation of the revised Dietary Guidelines and development of companion resources will be considered separately in due course.

Why is the revision taking so long?

Diet is a huge topic, with a large volume of evidence that must be systematically screened for relevance.

Additional processes have been included in the revision of the Dietary Guidelines to ensure the evidence review processes are robust and strengthen transparency.

Additional scoping activities have been undertaken to explore opportunities to use existing scientific evidence without compromising NHMRC’s high standards for quality and transparency.

These additional processes have been added to the timeline. For the updated timeline visit Guideline development.

Questions about sustainability in the revision

Why is sustainability being considered in the Dietary Guidelines?

Stakeholders (including consumers) are interested in sustainability. While information on diet and sustainability was included in the 2013 Guidelines, it was one of the key new topics respondents nominated for review in an NHMRC 2021 stakeholder survey. One in 3 respondents included diet and sustainability when answering the question about what new topics should be included in the revised guidelines.

The Dietary Guidelines Expert Committee prioritised diet and nutrition topics for evidence review after the detailed scoping and consultation. They considered diet and sustainability a high priority for evidence review as there is likely to be significant new evidence since the development of the 2013 Dietary Guidelines. A detailed description of the scoping activities and prioritisation process is published in the Prioritisation Process Report for the review of the evidence underpinning the Australian Dietary Guidelines.

In addition, the National Health and Climate Strategy includes an action to consider economic, social, and environmental sustainability in the revised Dietary Guidelines. Australia is a signatory to the COP28 Declaration on Food and Agriculture which includes an action to consider the environmental and social impacts of agriculture and food systems in public policy.

Evidence informed recommendations need to assess the quality of the evidence, the balance of benefits and harms and other relevant contextual factors such as:

• is it acceptable
• is it feasible
• is it equitable
• is it sustainable (social, environmental, economic).

There are standard frameworks for evidence-to-decision in guideline development to ensure such contextual factors are systematically considered (GRADE, WHO-INTEGRATE). Looking at sustainability has been identified as part of that evidence-to-decision process.

NHMRC understands that sustainability encompasses a wide range of issues which may include environmental, social and economic considerations. 

How will sustainability be addressed in the Dietary Guidelines?

The Dietary Guidelines Expert Committee advised that recommendations for dietary patterns and food groups should firstly consider health impacts relevant to Australians, followed by consideration of sustainability and other contextual factors. This is consistent with how sustainability has been included in dietary guidelines in other countries.

The Dietary Guidelines Sustainability Working Group will advise the Expert Committee on the strength and quality of evidence about sustainability and diet. Sustainability will consider social, economic and environmental factors. The Sustainability Working Group is not responsible for drafting and development of guideline recommendations. The Expert Committee remains responsible for advising on recommendations.

Why is sustainability being considered separately?

The Dietary Guidelines Expert Committee members have experience in public health and evidence evaluation related to nutrition. The Expert Committee identified the need for additional expertise in fields related to sustainability and suggested a working group.

The Dietary Guidelines Sustainability Working Group members were appointed based on their recognised expertise in areas such as:

• evidence translation
• environmental science
• agriculture/aquaculture
• food science/manufacturing
• public policy
• economics/social economics/sociology
• Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples
• regional and remote areas
• equity.

People with diverse backgrounds and expertise were appointed to the Working Group to ensure a broad range of evidence is considered. NHMRC appointed a strong and experienced chair and has strategies to manage differing opinions of members during the life of the Working Group.

The Working Group will provide broader expertise and advice to the Expert Committee and has no role in drafting the final recommendations – this remains the responsibility of the Expert Committee.

Will agencies outside health be included in the process?

The Dietary Guidelines Sustainability Working Group includes an appropriate mix of subject matter experts, including from outside health. Expertise was sought in:

• evidence translation
• environmental science
• agriculture/aquaculture
• food science/manufacturing
• public policy
• economics/social economics/sociology
• Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples
• regional and remote areas
• equity.

A broad range of expertise was sought beyond the health area. The Dietary Guidelines Governance Committee noted (in May 2024) that individuals with the required expertise and links to industry may be considered for appointment, as the Working Group does not have a role in drafting or developing recommendations – this remains the responsibility of the Dietary Guidelines Expert Committee. Appointment to the Working Group was dependent on the expertise and all actual and potential conflicts of interests of individuals.

The Working Group will provide advice to the Expert Committee on the most appropriate approach to identify and consider the evidence about diet and sustainability.

It is likely that input from relevant government departments will be sought during scoping work on sustainability and representatives from these departments may be invited to observe Working Group meetings.

All relevant government departments will be invited to comment upon the draft guidelines.

How will consumers provide input (including farmers)?

Stakeholders, including consumers and consumer representative groups, will have the opportunity to comment on the draft Dietary Guidelines before they are published. NHMRC is considering options to further engage consumers and consumer groups during the development of the draft guidelines.

The Dietary Guidelines Sustainability Working Group will provide advice on the strength and quality of evidence relating to accessible, affordable and equitable diets with low environmental impact. Members were appointed for their expertise in environmental science, agri/aquaculture, economics, social equity, food security, public policy. Applicants with expertise in evidence evaluation and research translation expertise were prioritised due to the role of the Working Group. There were no suitable applicants with a consumer advocacy background.

NHMRC has created an Australian Dietary Guidelines contact list to provide stakeholders with updates on the revision process. All interested stakeholders are invited to subscribe to our contact list.

Questions about the new evidence reviews

What are the topics for the new evidence reviews being commissioned?

The Dietary Guidelines Expert Committee identified the specific research questions for the new evidence reviews on diet and health outcomes across different life stages. More about this process can be found in the Dietary Guidelines Evidence Review Strategy.

New evidence reviews on diet and health outcomes in all age groups are on:

• Dietary patterns and new diagnoses of anxiety and depression in all age groups (including pre/post-natal depression during pregnancy and breastfeeding).
• Ultra-processed food (UPF) and new diagnoses of anxiety/depression, asthma and dietary allergies, and neurocognitive development in children and adolescents.
• Dietary factors (dietary patterns, source of protein or UPF consumption) associated with maternal and birth outcomes during pregnancy and breastfeeding.
• UPF and all-cause mortality and new diagnoses of cardiovascular events, type 2 diabetes, cancer and anxiety/depression in adults.

New evidence reviews in the older adult population will look at:

• sarcopenia (age-related muscle wasting) and consumption of protein-rich food
• neurocognitive conditions (including dementia and Alzheimer’s disease) and consumption of protein-rich food.

Research questions for the new evidence reviews on diet and sustainability were developed by the Dietary Guidelines Sustainability Working Group with guidance from the Expert Committee. These new evidence reviews will identify Australian studies on the:

• environmental impact of consuming different dietary patterns, protein-rich foods and UPFs
• implications of different dietary patterns on sociocultural acceptability, accessibility, equity, cost and affordability of food.

Why are you reviewing ultra-processed foods?

Stakeholders are interested in ultra-processed foods. In the NHMRC 2021 stakeholder survey, the most requested new topic was food processing, including ultra-processed foods. The Dietary Guidelines Expert Committee also considered ultra-processed foods and health outcomes a high priority for evidence review as it is an active area of research and there is likely to be significant new evidence since the 2013 Dietary Guidelines.

Find more information about the scoping and prioritisation activities, evidence mapping process and new evidence reviews.

Why are you doing a review on diet and anxiety/depression?

Very few systematic reviews addressing mental health as an outcome were found after mapping of existing systematic reviews was completed. The Dietary Guidelines Expert Committee considered this an important gap and requested exploration of primary studies to better understand the evidence.

Although there are many potential mental health outcomes that could be measured, the Expert Committee chose to focus on anxiety and depression. This is consistent with these conditions being identified as the highest priority for evidence review during the prioritisation process, as they account for the highest burden of mental illness in Australia.

Evidence reviewers will first explore whether there is enough reliable evidence available to address the research question via a scoping review. If so, they may be asked to conduct a systematic review of the evidence.

Find more information about the scoping and prioritisation activities, evidence mapping process and new evidence reviews.

Why are you doing a review on dietary patterns during pregnancy/breastfeeding?

The Dietary Guidelines Expert Committee found there was a general lack of good quality systematic reviews for this group after mapping existing systematic reviews was completed. They advised it is important to explore whether there are primary studies that can address this topic.

Evidence reviewers will first explore whether there is enough reliable evidence available to address the research question via a scoping review. If so, they may be asked to conduct a systematic review of the evidence.

Find more information about the scoping and prioritisation activities, evidence mapping process and new evidence reviews.

Why are you reviewing protein-rich food consumption in older adults?

Stakeholders are interested in consumption of protein-rich foods in older adults. In the NHMRC 2021 stakeholder survey, about one in 3 respondents who mentioned diet for older adults reported protein intake as a high priority for older adults. Consumption of adequate protein was also a key concern raised by stakeholders who work with older adults during targeted consultation.

After mapping existing systematic reviews to the highest priority research questions, the Dietary Guidelines Expert Committee identified a key evidence gap in systematic reviews on protein-rich food consumption for the health outcomes of sarcopenia and neurocognitive conditions.

For more information see scoping and prioritisation activities, evidence mapping process and new evidence reviews.

Why are you reviewing sarcopenia and neurocognitive conditions in older adults?

The highest priority topics for evidence review for older adults are similar to other age groups, but include some outcomes that are more specific to older adults. Evidence on older adults may be captured in the new evidence reviews currently underway on diet and health outcomes for the broader population. Therefore, the Dietary Guidelines Expert Committee prioritised outcomes that are more relevant to older adults, such quality of life, neurocognitive health, sarcopenia, bone health, falls, frailty and fractures.

Limited high-quality systematic reviews addressing protein-rich food consumption and sarcopenia and neurocognitive conditions were found after mapping existing systematic reviews to the priority research questions.  

For more information see scoping and prioritisation activities, evidence mapping process and new evidence reviews.

Why are you seeking Australian studies on the environmental impact of different dietary factors?

The Dietary Guidelines Sustainability Working Group chose to explore and better understand the available Australian evidence on the environmental impact of different dietary patterns, protein-rich foods and ultra-processed foods because they considered it important to understand diet and sustainability in the Australian context. The Working Group acknowledged information published by recognised international groups on diet and sustainability. However, Australian consumption patterns, food production methods, extent of food importation and the Australian environment may differ from other countries.

This scoping review will provide the Working Group with information about available Australian studies. This will assist them in their role of providing advice to the Dietary Guidelines Expert Committee on the strength and quality of evidence on diet and sustainability.

Why are you seeking Australian studies on the implications of dietary patterns on socio-cultural and economic outcomes?

Sustainable diets are not limited to environmental impact. The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations and the World Health Organization report on Sustainable healthy diets: guiding principles (2019) notes the importance of promoting healthy diets which are also socio-culturally acceptable and economically accessible for all, in addition to having a low environmental impact.

The Dietary Guidelines Sustainability Working Group considered it important to identify Australian evidence on the impact of dietary patterns on social-cultural and economic factors in the Australian context. These factors can impact an individual’s or household’s food choices and are important considerations when developing nutrition advice for the population.

This scoping review will provide the Working Group with information about available Australian studies. This will assist them in their role of providing advice to the Dietary Guidelines Expert Committee on the strength and quality of evidence on diet and sustainability.

What is a systematic review? What is a scoping review? How are they different?

Systematic reviews try to answer research questions by collating information from individual research studies (primary studies). Before work begins, the research question and the methods to be used must be clearly stated, including which primary studies are eligible to be included. They take a thorough and transparent approach in collecting and considering the results of primary studies, to minimise bias and improve the reliability of the review findings.

Scoping reviews are exploratory, and often address a broader question than a systematic review. Scoping reviews may assess the extent of the available evidence, organise it into groups and highlight gaps.  

For example, while a systematic review may try to answer a research question about whether eating vegetables reduces the risk of cardiovascular disease, a scoping review may try to identify if there are primary studies that can answer this research question, and describe the characteristics of these studies. If a scoping review finds no studies, this might help researchers decide a systematic review is likely to be of limited value and resources could be better directed elsewhere.

More detail about the types of reviews can be found in the Dietary Guidelines Evidence Review Strategy.

Why are non-English language studies being excluded from the new evidence reviews?

The Dietary Guidelines Expert Committee considered the benefit versus the use of resources to translate non-English language studies. Key factors that contributed to the Expert Committees decision to exclude non-English language studies were that:

• Many researchers in countries comparable to Australia use English for science communication
• Large or important studies conducted in non-English speaking countries are likely to be published in English for broader dissemination
• English language studies are likely to be more relevant to the Australian context.

How are the new reviews being conducted? Who is involved?

NHMRC has rigorous standards in place to ensure that guidelines and public health advice are high quality and based on the best available scientific evidence. The revision process, including the approach to evidence reviews, is outlined in the Dietary Guidelines Evidence Review Strategy.

Independent evidence reviewers (with expertise in nutrition and conducting evidence reviews) will complete the new evidence reviews. The protocols and Evidence Evaluation Reports for the new reviews will be reviewed by independent methodological experts, consumer reviewers and the Dietary Guidelines Expert Committee.

Independent evidence reviewers and methodological reviewers were sought through an open tender. Procurement was undertaken consistent with Commonwealth Procurement Rules. An external probity adviser provided independent advice on procedural fairness and integrity throughout the procurement process.

Contractors, and their specified personnel, were required to declare relevant interests in line with NHMRC processes for managing interests. The Dietary Guidelines Governance Committee assisted with assessment and management strategies for conflicts of interest where required.

How long will new evidence reviews take to complete?

Evidence reviews involve several steps such as developing a review protocol, literature searching, screening, assessing risk of bias, data extraction and report writing. The process is detailed in the Dietary Guidelines Evidence Review Strategy.

It is anticipated the commissioned evidence reviews will take 9 to 12 months to complete.

Once the evidence review process is complete, the findings will be considered through an evidence-to-decision process to inform the development of recommendations. For more information about the process, visit Guideline development.

How were the research questions for new evidence reviews selected?

The Dietary Guidelines Expert Committee identified priority diet and nutrition topics for evidence review based on detailed scoping and consultation. Research questions were then identified based on public health considerations and the likelihood of significant new evidence having emerged since the 2013 Dietary Guidelines. More information about this is in the two Prioritisation Process Reports – one for older Australians and one for the general population.

The revision’s limited resources mean systematic reviews cannot be commissioned for all the prioritised research questions, or all the research questions previously reviewed in the 2013 Guidelines. Instead, evidence mapping activities have identified existing, high-quality systematic reviews to update the evidence for some of the priority questions.

Some important gaps remain, so the Expert Committee has requested new evidence reviews (see questions above for the new evidence review topics). For more information about the new evidence reviews, visit New evidence reviews. To learn how existing systematic reviews were identified, see Reviewing the evidence.

What are you doing for topics where you are not conducting a new evidence review?

Existing, high-quality systematic reviews are being used to address the topics identified as the highest priority for evidence review where possible. This is to make effective use of limited resources and avoid duplication of existing quality research.

Systematic reviews addressing the highest priority questions were found through literature searches and two public calls for systematic reviews (one for all age groups and one for older adults). To be considered suitable, systematic reviews needed to meet specific eligibility criteria. Suitable systematic reviews were then mapped to each high priority research question.

Resource constraints limit the number of existing reviews that can be used and the number of new reviews that can be commissioned. The highest priority research questions that are unable to be addressed via new evidence reviews or using existing systematic reviews will be noted as evidence gaps in the final Guidelines.

Topics considered to be critical for dietary guideline recommendations, but not requiring a full evidence update, will be considered using:

• existing evidence from the 2013 Dietary Guidelines where the evidence underpinning recommendations is not likely to have changed significantly since their release
• systematic reviews published by recognised international groups.

For more information about this process, see Reviewing the evidence.

How can stakeholders get involved?

The Dietary Guidelines Expert Committee identified priority diet and nutrition topics for review based on detailed scoping and consultation. All stakeholders, including consumers, had the opportunity to inform the priority topics for evidence review through the stakeholder survey.

A public call for primary research studies for some of the commissioned evidence reviews was held. For details about what primary studies were eligible for inclusion, visit Public call for peer-reviewed primary research studies eligibility criteria and research questions.

All stakeholders will have the opportunity to comment on the draft guidelines.

NHMRC is considering options to further engage consumers and consumer groups during the development of the draft guidelines. For more information about public consultation in the revision, see Communication and consultation. To receive notifications when consultation opportunities are open, and other updates related to the review, we encourage you to subscribe to our contact list.

What happens when you have finished reviewing the evidence?

Upon completion of the evidence review stage, the Dietary Guidelines Expert Committee will consider the new evidence reviews and existing systematic reviews. This evidence will be described and assessed for certainty to guide decision making for final guideline recommendations. See the Guideline development page for more information about next steps.

Questions about the public call for evidence (primary studies)

What is a peer-reviewed primary research study?

A peer-reviewed primary research study is an individual study in which researchers generate their own data. The study has been evaluated by experts before being published in a scientific journal.

This is different to a systematic review which collates and synthesises data from a number of primary research studies.

Why are studies about ultra-processed foods restricted to those published from 2009 onwards?

To make the most effective use of limited resources, the Dietary Guidelines Expert Committee advised inclusion of recent studies with the most relevant methods.

2009 was chosen as a cut off for papers discussing ultra-processed foods to align with the publication of papers by Monteiro et al describing the NOVA food classification system which categorises foods by the degree to which they are processed. The highest category is ‘ultra-processed’.

Why are all other studies restricted to those published from 1995 onwards?

To make the most effective use of limited resources, the Dietary Guidelines Expert Committee advised inclusion of recent studies with the most relevant methods.

1995 was chosen as a cut off for all other studies (such as, studies that do not discuss ultra-processed foods) as this coincides with the emergence of evidence-based medicine (EBM) and quality checklists/reporting tools.

How do I submit peer-reviewed primary research studies for consideration?

The public call was open from 19 February to 14 March 2025.  

Submitted primary research studies had to answer one of the research questions and meet the required eligibility criteria.

How will my submitted primary research studies be used?

NHMRC will undertake preliminary screening of the studies submitted to remove those that clearly do not meet the eligibility criteria. The remaining studies will be provided to the contractor conducting the evidence review. The contractor will assess their eligibility in the same manner as studies the contractor identified via their literature search.