Such an elegantly designed study, but a problematic abstract: first, the authors don't give the underlying sample number, only the number of deaths prevented. I know the point is comparing assessment tools, but proving the N would give some context. In addition, the conclusion "results provide some insights as the potential impact of following various dietary guidelines to reduce mortality from nutrition-related diseases" is not so much a conclusion as it is a restatement of the title.
A major study with contrary findings, published in the early 2010s, made a big splash in consumer health news, but I never heard of the equally compelling results from this study.
It may be that the evidence of biased reviews of reviewers in a specific country toward works by researchers in the same country is due to the (sometimes atrocious) translation to the reviewer's first language. Unfortunately, the abstract doesn't actually say in which direction they observed bias.
A nice write-up, but I am puzzled by what this statement means, in context: "Schools and the local community were identified as suitable settings." Settings for what?
基金