期刊论文详细信息
The British Journal of Nutrition
Comparison of nutrient profiling models for assessing the nutritional quality of foods: a validation study
Marie-Ève Labonté^2^31  Theresa Poon^12  Christine Mulligan^13  Mavra Ahmed^14 
[1]Department of Nutritional Sciences,University of Toronto,FitzGerald Building,150 College Street,Toronto,ON,Canada,M5S 3E2,^2
[2]Department of Nutritional Sciences,University of Toronto,FitzGerald Building,150 College Street,Toronto,ON,Canada,M5S 3E2^1
[3]Institute of Nutrition and Functional Foods,Laval University,2440 Hochelaga Boulevard,Québec City,QC,Canada,G1V 0A6^3
[4]Nutrition and Dietetics,College of Nursing and Health Sciences,Flinders University,GPO Box 2100,Adelaide,SA 5001,Australia^4
关键词: Nutrient profiling;    Nutritional quality;    Healthfulness;    Validation;    Content validity;    Construct validity;    Convergent validity;   
DOI  :  10.1017/S0007114518001575
Subject:61.3
来源: Cambridge University Press
PDF
【 摘 要 】
Nutrient profiling (NP) is a method for evaluating the healthfulness of foods. Although many NP models exist, most have not been validated. This study aimed to examine the content and construct/convergent validity of five models from different regions: Australia/New Zealand (FSANZ), France (Nutri-Score), Canada (HCST), Europe (EURO) and Americas (PAHO). Using data from the 2013 UofT Food Label Information Program (n15342 foods/beverages), construct/convergent validity was assessed by comparing the classifications of foods determined by each model to a previously validated model, which served as the reference (Ofcom). The parameters assessed included associations (Cochran–Armitage trend test), agreement (κ statistic) and discordant classifications (McNemar’s test). Analyses were conducted across all foods and by food category. On the basis of the nutrients/components considered by each model, all models exhibited moderate content validity. Although positive associations were observed between each model and Ofcom (all Ptrend 0·001), agreement with Ofcom was ‘near perfect’ for FSANZ (κ=0·89) and Nutri-Score (κ=0·83), ‘moderate’ for EURO (κ=0·54) and ‘fair’ for PAHO (κ=0·28) and HCST (κ=0·26). There were discordant classifications with Ofcom for 5·3 % (FSANZ), 8·3 % (Nutri-Score), 22·0 % (EURO), 33·4 % (PAHO) and 37·0 % (HCST) of foods (all P 0·001). Construct/convergent validity was confirmed between FSANZ and Nutri-Score v. Ofcom, and to a lesser extent between EURO v. Ofcom. Numerous incongruencies with Ofcom were identified for HCST and PAHO, which highlights the importance of examining classifications across food categories, the level at which differences between models become apparent. These results may be informative for regulators seeking to adapt and validate existing models for use in country-specific applications.
【 授权许可】

CC BY   

【 预 览 】
附件列表
Files Size Format View
RO201911043498362ZK.pdf 2418KB PDF download
  文献评价指标  
  下载次数:2次 浏览次数:4次