A Comprehensive Systematic Review of Dynamic Nutrient Profiling for Personalized Diet Planning: Meta-Analysis and PRISMA-Based Evidence Synthesis

TL;DR

This study reviews how dynamic nutrient profiling can improve personalized diet planning, showing better dietary and health outcomes, but highlights the need for standardized methods and global research.

Contribution

The paper provides a systematic review and meta-analysis of dynamic nutrient profiling methods, revealing their effectiveness and identifying key research gaps.

Findings

Dynamic nutrient profiling significantly improves dietary quality and adherence compared to traditional methods.

AI-enhanced systems show better effectiveness than algorithmic approaches in personalized nutrition.

Weight reduction and cardiovascular risk markers improve with dynamic profiling, but heterogeneity remains high.

Abstract

Background and Objectives: Dynamic nutrient profiling represents a paradigm shift in personalized nutrition, integrating real-time nutritional assessment with individualized dietary recommendations through advanced algorithmic approaches, biomarker integration, and artificial intelligence. This comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis examines the current state of dynamic nutrient profiling methodologies for personalized diet planning, evaluating their effectiveness, methodological quality, and clinical outcomes. Methods: Following PRISMA 2020 guidelines, we conducted a comprehensive search of electronic databases (PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science, IEEE Xplore, and Google Scholar) from inception to December 2024. The protocol was prospectively registered in PROSPERO (Registration: CRD42024512893). Studies were systematically screened using predefined inclusion criteria, quality was assessed using validated tools (RoB 2, ROBINS-I, Newcastle–Ottawa Scale), and data were extracted using standardized forms. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed where appropriate, with heterogeneity assessed using I2 statistics. Publication bias was evaluated using funnel plots and Egger’s test. Results: From 2847 initially identified records plus 156 from additional sources, 117 studies met the inclusion criteria after removing 391 duplicates and systematic screening, representing 45,672 participants across 28 countries. Studies employed various methodological approaches: algorithmic-based profiling systems (76 studies), biomarker-integrated approaches (45 studies), and AI-enhanced personalized nutrition platforms (23 studies), with some studies utilizing multiple methodologies. Meta-analysis revealed significant improvements in dietary quality measures (standardized mean difference: 1.24, 95% CI: 0.89–1.59, p < 0.001), dietary adherence (risk ratio: 1.34, 95% CI: 1.18–1.52, p < 0.001), and clinical outcomes including weight reduction (mean difference: −2.8 kg, 95% CI: −4.2 to −1.4, p < 0.001) and improved cardiovascular risk markers. Substantial heterogeneity was observed across studies (I2 = 78–92%), attributed to methodological diversity and population characteristics. AI-enhanced systems demonstrated superior effectiveness (SMD = 1.67) compared to traditional algorithmic approaches (SMD = 1.08). However, current evidence is constrained by practical limitations, including the technological accessibility of dynamic profiling systems and equity concerns in vulnerable populations. Additionally, the evidence base shows geographical concentration, with most studies conducted in high-income countries, underscoring the need for research in diverse global settings. These findings have significant implications for shaping public health policies and clinical guidelines aimed at integrating personalized nutrition into healthcare systems and addressing dietary disparities at the population level. Conclusions: Dynamic nutrient profiling demonstrates significant promise for advancing personalized nutrition interventions, with robust evidence supporting improved nutritional and clinical outcomes. However, methodological standardization, long-term validation studies exceeding six months, and comprehensive cost-effectiveness analyses remain critical research priorities. The integration of artificial intelligence and multi-omics data represents the future direction of this rapidly evolving field.

Figures