Development and Validation of Healthy and Unhealthy Plant-Based Diet Propensity Scores in European Children, Adolescents and Adults From the I.Family Study

IF 2.9 3区 医学 Q3 NUTRITION & DIETETICS Journal of Human Nutrition and Dietetics Pub Date : 2025-02-05 DOI:10.1111/jhn.70021
Guiomar Masip, Jantje Goerdten, Tooba Asif, Antje Hebestreit, Monica Hunsberger, Lauren Lissner, Denes Molnar, Valeria Pala, Paola Russo, Michael Tornaritis, Toomas Veidebaum, Maike Wolters, Luis A. Moreno, Leonie H. Bogl
{"title":"Development and Validation of Healthy and Unhealthy Plant-Based Diet Propensity Scores in European Children, Adolescents and Adults From the I.Family Study","authors":"Guiomar Masip,&nbsp;Jantje Goerdten,&nbsp;Tooba Asif,&nbsp;Antje Hebestreit,&nbsp;Monica Hunsberger,&nbsp;Lauren Lissner,&nbsp;Denes Molnar,&nbsp;Valeria Pala,&nbsp;Paola Russo,&nbsp;Michael Tornaritis,&nbsp;Toomas Veidebaum,&nbsp;Maike Wolters,&nbsp;Luis A. Moreno,&nbsp;Leonie H. Bogl","doi":"10.1111/jhn.70021","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Introduction</h3>\n \n <p>Plant-based dietary patterns may reduce the risk of chronic diseases, but their benefits and risks in younger populations remain unclear due to variations in diet quality and nutrient adequacy. Robust tools to assess adherence to these patterns are essential. The aim of this study was to develop and validate three plant-based diet propensity (PBDP) scores – overall, healthy and unhealthy – to capture plant-based dietary patterns and assess their associations with nutrient intakes and health indicators in children, adolescents and adults.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>This cross-sectional study of children, adolescents and adults used data from the I.Family study (<i>n</i> = 15,780 participants) from eight European countries. Dietary intake was assessed using a food frequency questionnaire. The overall PBDP score was constructed by categorising all plant-based food groups as positive and animal-based food groups as negative. The healthy PBDP emphasised healthy plant-based food groups, whereas the unhealthy PBDP emphasised less healthy plant-based food groups. Validity was assessed through correlations with nutrient intakes and comparison across demographic groups. Associations with health indicators were also analysed.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>PBDP scores showed expected associations with nutrient intakes. Higher overall and healthy PBDP scores were observed in females, adults, individuals with higher parental educational levels and those from Belgium and Spain. The healthy PBDP score was associated with higher HDL cholesterol, improved bone stiffness and lower triglycerides. The unhealthy PBDP score was associated with lower HDL cholesterol in adults, but not in children or adolescents.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>PBDP scores describe plant-based dietary patterns across demographic groups and are valid and reliable in adults. The findings highlight challenges in assessing dietary patterns in children and adolescents. Future research should address these challenges to enhance the validity of PBDP scores in younger populations and further explore their potential in guiding dietary recommendations across all age groups.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":54803,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Human Nutrition and Dietetics","volume":"38 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Human Nutrition and Dietetics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jhn.70021","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"NUTRITION & DIETETICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction

Plant-based dietary patterns may reduce the risk of chronic diseases, but their benefits and risks in younger populations remain unclear due to variations in diet quality and nutrient adequacy. Robust tools to assess adherence to these patterns are essential. The aim of this study was to develop and validate three plant-based diet propensity (PBDP) scores – overall, healthy and unhealthy – to capture plant-based dietary patterns and assess their associations with nutrient intakes and health indicators in children, adolescents and adults.

Methods

This cross-sectional study of children, adolescents and adults used data from the I.Family study (n = 15,780 participants) from eight European countries. Dietary intake was assessed using a food frequency questionnaire. The overall PBDP score was constructed by categorising all plant-based food groups as positive and animal-based food groups as negative. The healthy PBDP emphasised healthy plant-based food groups, whereas the unhealthy PBDP emphasised less healthy plant-based food groups. Validity was assessed through correlations with nutrient intakes and comparison across demographic groups. Associations with health indicators were also analysed.

Results

PBDP scores showed expected associations with nutrient intakes. Higher overall and healthy PBDP scores were observed in females, adults, individuals with higher parental educational levels and those from Belgium and Spain. The healthy PBDP score was associated with higher HDL cholesterol, improved bone stiffness and lower triglycerides. The unhealthy PBDP score was associated with lower HDL cholesterol in adults, but not in children or adolescents.

Conclusion

PBDP scores describe plant-based dietary patterns across demographic groups and are valid and reliable in adults. The findings highlight challenges in assessing dietary patterns in children and adolescents. Future research should address these challenges to enhance the validity of PBDP scores in younger populations and further explore their potential in guiding dietary recommendations across all age groups.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
15.20%
发文量
133
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Human Nutrition and Dietetics is an international peer-reviewed journal publishing papers in applied nutrition and dietetics. Papers are therefore welcomed on: - Clinical nutrition and the practice of therapeutic dietetics - Clinical and professional guidelines - Public health nutrition and nutritional epidemiology - Dietary surveys and dietary assessment methodology - Health promotion and intervention studies and their effectiveness - Obesity, weight control and body composition - Research on psychological determinants of healthy and unhealthy eating behaviour. Focus can for example be on attitudes, brain correlates of food reward processing, social influences, impulsivity, cognitive control, cognitive processes, dieting, psychological treatments. - Appetite, Food intake and nutritional status - Nutrigenomics and molecular nutrition - The journal does not publish animal research The journal is published in an online-only format. No printed issue of this title will be produced but authors will still be able to order offprints of their own articles.
期刊最新文献
Evaluation of a Trauma-Informed Nutrition Curriculum for Women With Children Living in Transitional Housing Socio-Demographic Determinants of Mediterranean Diet Adherence: Results of the EU-National Health Interview Survey (EHIS-3) Ultra-Processed Foods and Dietetic Practice: Findings From a Survey and Focus Group With UK Dietitians Pregnant Women's Experiences With a Collaborative Midwife-Dietitian Empowerment Programme to Improve Diet Quality Expert Opinions on an Optimal Infant Feeding Quantitative Data Framework: A Mixed Methods Delphi-Style Study in the UK
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1