↓ Skip to main content

Development of a standardized measure to assess food quality: a proof of concept

Overview of attention for article published in Nutrition Journal, November 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
83 Mendeley
Title
Development of a standardized measure to assess food quality: a proof of concept
Published in
Nutrition Journal, November 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12937-016-0215-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

L. H. Jomaa, N. C. Hwalla, J. M. Zidek

Abstract

Food-based dietary guidelines are promoted to improve diet quality. In applying dietary recommendations, such as the MyPlate, the number of servings in a food group is the unit of measure used to make food selections. However, within each food group, different foods can vary greatly in their nutritional quality despite often having similar energy (caloric) values. This study aimed to develop a novel unit of measure that accounts for both the quantity of energy and the quality of nutrients, as defined by caloric and micronutrient density, respectively, in foods and to demonstrate its usability in identifying high quality foods within a food group. A standardized unit of measure reflecting the quality of kilocalories for nutrition (qCaln) was developed through a mathematical function dependent on the energy content (kilocalories per 100 g) and micronutrient density of foods items within a food group. Nutrition composition of 1806 food items was extracted from the USDA nutrient database. For each food item analyzed, qCaln ratios were calculated to compare qCaln to its caloric content. Finally, a case example was developed comparing two plates adapted from the MyPlate. Examples of food items with highest and lowest qCaln ratios were displayed for five food groups: vegetables, fruits/fruit juices, milk/dairy products, meats/meat alternatives, and breads/cereals. Additionally, the applicability of the qCaln was presented through comparing two plates, adopted from the USDA MyPlate, to show differences in food quality. The newly developed qCaln measure can be used to rank foods in terms of their nutrient density while accounting for their energy content. The proposed metric can provide consumers, public health professionals, researchers, and policy makers with an easy-to-understand measure of food quality and a practical tool to assess diet quality among individuals and population groups.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 83 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
France 1 1%
Unknown 82 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 18 22%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 16%
Student > Master 10 12%
Researcher 5 6%
Student > Postgraduate 4 5%
Other 13 16%
Unknown 20 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 12 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 10 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 8%
Engineering 6 7%
Social Sciences 5 6%
Other 18 22%
Unknown 25 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 17 March 2017.
All research outputs
#15,395,259
of 22,903,988 outputs
Outputs from Nutrition Journal
#1,161
of 1,433 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#197,354
of 313,007 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nutrition Journal
#16
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,903,988 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,433 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 36.2. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 313,007 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.