Talk:MIND diet

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Sm372514.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 00:22, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Is journal unreliable, or is it because it is primary source?
I see that you have removed a couple references from Alzheimer's & Dementia & put "unreliable" as the reason in the edit summary. Is this because Alzheimer's & Dementia is inherently a questionable source or because the articles are primary sources & thus do not meet the standard for MEDRS? If it is the latter, please indicate "primary source" in your edit summaries, as this would be more informative for subsequent editors. Peaceray (talk) 19:40, 26 September 2017 (UTC)
 * They were removed because they were unreliable for the claim they were being used for, not because they were primary sources. Alexbrn (talk) 20:31, 26 September 2017 (UTC)
 * OK, so essentially not verified by source. Thanks! Peaceray (talk) 21:10, 26 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Not exactly - a primary source is reliable for some things and unreliable for others. Primary research can't be used to source assertions about WP:Biomedical information, especially claims of efficacy. WP:WHYMEDRS is good on this. This is why I've left some other poor/primary sources in the article, since they are not making health claims as such. Alexbrn (talk) 21:26, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

Additional journal articles
Like above, some of these are surveys & reviews, but are of limited use because they all are usually citing the same one or two primary studies. Really, there needs to be replication & accounting for other lifestyle factors. Peaceray (talk) 16:28, 27 September 2017 (UTC)
 * (see tables)
 * (see tables)
 * (see tables)

PBIO5180 Evaluation
The material is organized into three sections (introduction, current research, and recommended regimen). Within the introduction section, the information lacks cohesion. There are three disjointed thoughts: (1) a definition of the MIND diet, (2) a statement saying that the evidence is inconclusive, and (3) a sentence naming the creator of the diet. The research section is only one sentence long and states that research is inconclusive. The “regimen” section is the most organized section of the article. It is split into two categories, MIND recommended foods and discouraged foods. However, in the discouraged foods section, the MIND diet serving recommendation is given which confuses the message. Does the diet discourage less than four servings of red meat per week, or does the diet discourage red meat consumption and recommends limiting it to less than four servings per week? The way it is written, the reader does not know. The introduction, research and “regimen recommended foods” sections are understandable. The “regimen discouraged foods” component needs work to make it understandable for the reader.

The article partially covers the MIND diet. It goes into detail regarding recommended foods but lacks information in background and current research. There are five cited sources, and one of them is from a peer reviewed, scientific journal. Three of the sources are news reports. These are not peer reviewed and may present the information in a biased way. The fifth source is WebMD which is not peer reviewed and is not supported by the medical community. One major assumption was made regarding research findings. The article states that, to date, research on the MIND diet has been of “poor quality”, possibly meaning past research was inconclusive, and it is challenging to make diet recommendations based off this information. This conclusion is based off one peer reviewed journal. The author assumed that the information presented in this source is representative of MIND diet literature as a whole. The content could be improved by including more background information in the introduction and by utilizing peer reviewed journal articles as sources rather than news reports and websites. There should be an additional section on the history and development of the diet. Within the research section, experimental findings should be discussed.

The article has an introduction, although it is lacking in content. The introduction is understandable, and it does hit on the author’s key point that research on the diet is inconclusive. However, there should be a summary in the introduction of recommended foods as there is a separate section on diet recommendations. There are several headings (two total) and no subheadings. There is a large amount of missing content, particularly in the research section. There are no images or diagrams included in this article. There is a table listed “Human Diets” that is appropriately placed after the references section. The table appears to be an index of different articles on Wikipedia that are related to diets. The author properly referenced each piece of information, albeit with sources that are potentially biased. Therefore, the information itself is biased, but it is presented in an unbiased manner. With the small amount of information included in this article, it is challenging to determine if facts are emphasized. The author emphasized that one article stated that past research has been inconclusive. One of the sources is a peer-reviewed journal. The peer-review process should make it more reliable. Three of the sources are news reports. News reports can be (and are often) biased, but they should be based on facts. One source is WebMD. WebMD is not recognized by the medical community as a reputable source. Sm372514 (talk) 12:40, 26 October 2017 (UTC)

Other foods
In what category would fruits (bananas, apples, grapes, pears, citrus, etc.) and dairy (yogurt, milk, fermented milk, etc.) would go? AnotherTimeline (talk) 23:29, 12 November 2023 (UTC)


 * I think the MIND diet is "neutral" when it comes to other fruits and non-cheese dairy: "However, the MIND diet uniquely specifies consumption of berries and green leafy vegetables, and does not specify high fruit consumption (both DASH and Mediterranean), high dairy (DASH), high potato consumption or greater than 1 fish meal per week (Mediterranean)." a455bcd9 (Antoine) (talk) 09:55, 13 November 2023 (UTC)