A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 197

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 197
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 271
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3145
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

The Nutrient Profiling of Swedish Food Products-A Study of the Alignment of the Multi-Level Criteria for the Choices and Nutri-Score Systems with the Nordic Keyhole Logo. | LitMetric

Background: The European Commission has called for a harmonised front-of-package nutritional label (FOPNL) system in the European region. The Keyhole is a widely adopted positive FOPNL used in several Nordic countries. The Nutri-Score is a five-level graded FOPNL, more recently introduced in Western Europe. Both FOPNLs are supported by intrinsically different nutrient profiling systems (NPSs). A third NPS is the Choices NPS, which originally supported a positive FOPNL similar to the Keyhole and has been expanded into a five-level NPS.

Objectives: The main objective of this study was to investigate the overall alignment between both the Choices and Nutri-Score multi-level NPSs and the Keyhole NPS. Furthermore, food group-based alignment was analysed to understand the main sources of misalignment.

Methods: In this study, we extracted 1064 food/drink items from the food and beverage database of the Swedish Food Administration. All products were assessed according to all three NPSs, and alignment was assessed, using the Keyhole NPS as a recommendation-based reference. Two definitions of alignment were examined-healthier (more lenient, i.e., two highest grades) and healthiest (stricter, i.e., only the highest grade).

Results: The overall alignment between the Choices and Keyhole NPSs was similar to that between the Nutri-Score and Keyhole NPSs (89% and 85% alignment under the healthiest definition, i.e., stricter). However, two food groups showed poor alignment between the Nutri-Score NPS and the Keyhole NPS (~60%). Under the healthier (more lenient) definition, the alignment for both the Choices and Nutri-Score systems with the Keyhole system was lower (86% and 79%).

Conclusions: The alignments and misalignments between the Choices/Nutri-Score systems and the Keyhole system prompt important considerations for future developments of FOPNL systems for the Nordic countries. Extending the Keyhole NPS to include a multi-level criterion could potentially help consumers identify healthier choices, even for less nutritious foods.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11819656PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/nu17030421DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

keyhole nps
16
choices nutri-score
12
alignment choices
12
keyhole
11
alignment
9
nutrient profiling
8
swedish food
8
nutri-score systems
8
systems nordic
8
positive fopnl
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!