Sure, start with these. Good references, too.

Perspective: Limiting Dependence on Nonrandomized Studies and Improving Randomized Trials in Human Nutrition Research: Why and How https://academic.oup.com/advances/article/9/4/367/5055939

Implausible results in human nutrition research https://www.bmj.com/content/347/bmj.f6698

His most famous paper, Why Most Published Research Findings Are False https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/jo...

Here's a talk on nutrition science methods, along with a specific audience moment with Walter Willet, former head of Harvard Nutrition dept, and advocate for his questionnaires. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KTAbx4i8Dyg -- https://youtu.be/KTAbx4i8Dyg?t=23m40s

After reading the BMJ piece I wondered if any study strategy would satisfy Ioannidis, to be honest. I came away from it feeling like his calls to eliminate observational studies and smaller randomized trials are misleading in that he seems to believe that all realistic studies should be eliminated.

He seems to be in favor of large randomized-controlled comprehensive diet protocols, for example, where many aspects of diets are manipulated simultaneously. He dismisses them too, though, for very good reasons. Given that there were additional reasons to be skeptical of such studies he didn't mention, I was left wondering if his pleas for study designs should be heeded very much (as opposed to his criticism of specific flaws). I love his work, but am wondering if it's best approached as worst-case criticism rather than an inspiration for what to do.

That's interesting. I read him (in total) as being quite optimistic about the way forward, if intertia and self-interest can be overcome.

He's listed as an author in a number of nutritional and other studies. One might see those as leaning in his direction, if he's willing to be mentioned.

You might contact him if you have additional doubts.