Abstract
Several meta-analyses have found a positive association between a popular type of "fad diet", ketogenic diets, and their effect on anthropometric and blood parameters. However, the non-specific inclusion criteria for meta-analyses may lead to incorrect conclusions. The aim of this literature review is to highlight the main confounders and methodological pitfalls of meta-analyses on ketogenic diets by inspecting the presence of key inclusion criteria. The PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science databases and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were searched for meta-analyses. Most meta-analyses did not define the essential parameters of a ketogenic diet (i.e., calories, macronutrient ratio, types of fatty acids, ketone bodies, etc.) as inclusion criteria. Of the 28 included meta-analyses, few addressed collecting real, re-measured nutritional data from the ketogenic diet and control groups in parallel with the pre-designed nutritional data. Most meta-analyses reported positive results in favor of ketogenic diets, which can result in erroneous conclusions considering the numerous methodological pitfalls and confounders. Well-designed clinical trials with comparable results and their meta-analyses are needed. Until then, medical professionals should not recommend ketogenic diets as a form of weight loss when other well-known dietary options have been shown to be healthy and effective.