出版偏差与 Nutri-Score:关于包装正面标识 Nutri-Score 有效性证据的完整文献综述

IF 2.4 Q3 NUTRITION & DIETETICS PharmaNutrition Pub Date : 2024-02-13 DOI:10.1016/j.phanu.2024.100380
Stephan Peters , Hans Verhagen
{"title":"出版偏差与 Nutri-Score:关于包装正面标识 Nutri-Score 有效性证据的完整文献综述","authors":"Stephan Peters ,&nbsp;Hans Verhagen","doi":"10.1016/j.phanu.2024.100380","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>The front-of-pack label Nutri-Score is currently proposed as the system of choice in seven EU countries. However, there is still much scientific debate about the validation and efficacy of Nutri-Score and there is much discussion about author affiliation and study outcome.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>To address these issues, we conducted a complete PubMed search on Nutri-Score which resulted in n = 180 results and selected all papers that address the relevance of the evidence for the validation of Nutri-Score (n = 104).</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Our main observations are that the large majority of studies that support the Nutri-Score are carried out by the developers of Nutri-Score. In contrast, the majority (61%) of studies that are carried out independently from the developers of Nutri-Score showed unfavourable results. A second observation is that even though the theoretical effect of Nutri-Score is validated on a multi-nutrient algorithm (FSA-NPS), there is no real-life evidence of any beneficial effects of Nutri-Score on this algorithm in a complete supermarket range. In conclusion, there is insufficient scientific evidence to support the use of Nutri-Score as an effective public health tool.</p></div><div><h3>Discussion</h3><p>Overall, the available evidence is limited and biased, and more research is needed to substantiate or disprove the effectiveness of Nutri-Score.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":20049,"journal":{"name":"PharmaNutrition","volume":"27 ","pages":"Article 100380"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2213434424000069/pdfft?md5=345dff8a58f1d4271392ca50e90247d6&pid=1-s2.0-S2213434424000069-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Publication bias and Nutri-Score: A complete literature review of the substantiation of the effectiveness of the front-of-pack logo Nutri-Score\",\"authors\":\"Stephan Peters ,&nbsp;Hans Verhagen\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.phanu.2024.100380\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>The front-of-pack label Nutri-Score is currently proposed as the system of choice in seven EU countries. However, there is still much scientific debate about the validation and efficacy of Nutri-Score and there is much discussion about author affiliation and study outcome.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>To address these issues, we conducted a complete PubMed search on Nutri-Score which resulted in n = 180 results and selected all papers that address the relevance of the evidence for the validation of Nutri-Score (n = 104).</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Our main observations are that the large majority of studies that support the Nutri-Score are carried out by the developers of Nutri-Score. In contrast, the majority (61%) of studies that are carried out independently from the developers of Nutri-Score showed unfavourable results. A second observation is that even though the theoretical effect of Nutri-Score is validated on a multi-nutrient algorithm (FSA-NPS), there is no real-life evidence of any beneficial effects of Nutri-Score on this algorithm in a complete supermarket range. In conclusion, there is insufficient scientific evidence to support the use of Nutri-Score as an effective public health tool.</p></div><div><h3>Discussion</h3><p>Overall, the available evidence is limited and biased, and more research is needed to substantiate or disprove the effectiveness of Nutri-Score.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20049,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"PharmaNutrition\",\"volume\":\"27 \",\"pages\":\"Article 100380\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2213434424000069/pdfft?md5=345dff8a58f1d4271392ca50e90247d6&pid=1-s2.0-S2213434424000069-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"PharmaNutrition\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2213434424000069\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"NUTRITION & DIETETICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PharmaNutrition","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2213434424000069","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"NUTRITION & DIETETICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景目前有七个欧盟国家建议将包装前标签 Nutri-Score 作为首选系统。为了解决这些问题,我们在PubMed上对Nutri-Score进行了一次完整的搜索,共搜索出n = 180个结果,并选择了所有涉及Nutri-Score验证证据相关性的论文(n = 104)。结果我们的主要观察结果是,支持Nutri-Score的绝大多数研究都是由Nutri-Score的开发者进行的。与此相反,大多数(61%)独立于 Nutri-Score 开发者开展的研究显示了不利的结果。第二个观察结果是,尽管 Nutri-Score 的理论效果在多营养素算法(FSA-NPS)上得到了验证,但没有实际证据表明 Nutri-Score 在整个超市范围内对这一算法有任何有利影响。总之,没有足够的科学证据支持将 Nutri-Score 作为一种有效的公共卫生工具。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Publication bias and Nutri-Score: A complete literature review of the substantiation of the effectiveness of the front-of-pack logo Nutri-Score

Background

The front-of-pack label Nutri-Score is currently proposed as the system of choice in seven EU countries. However, there is still much scientific debate about the validation and efficacy of Nutri-Score and there is much discussion about author affiliation and study outcome.

Methods

To address these issues, we conducted a complete PubMed search on Nutri-Score which resulted in n = 180 results and selected all papers that address the relevance of the evidence for the validation of Nutri-Score (n = 104).

Results

Our main observations are that the large majority of studies that support the Nutri-Score are carried out by the developers of Nutri-Score. In contrast, the majority (61%) of studies that are carried out independently from the developers of Nutri-Score showed unfavourable results. A second observation is that even though the theoretical effect of Nutri-Score is validated on a multi-nutrient algorithm (FSA-NPS), there is no real-life evidence of any beneficial effects of Nutri-Score on this algorithm in a complete supermarket range. In conclusion, there is insufficient scientific evidence to support the use of Nutri-Score as an effective public health tool.

Discussion

Overall, the available evidence is limited and biased, and more research is needed to substantiate or disprove the effectiveness of Nutri-Score.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
PharmaNutrition
PharmaNutrition Agricultural and Biological Sciences-Food Science
CiteScore
5.70
自引率
3.10%
发文量
33
审稿时长
12 days
期刊最新文献
A therapeutic approach to identify leading molecules from natural products and therapeutic targets in CKD by network pharmacology Efficacy and safety of crocin supplementation in patients with central serous chorioretinopathy, a pilot randomized double blinded clinical trial Dietitians’ knowledge and practice regarding inflammaging and related interventions: A pilot survey Exploring the molecular mechanisms and therapeutic benefits of L-theanine in counteracting inflammation Enhanced absorption of omega-3 fatty acids from a novel krill oil-derived phospholipid formulation compared to fish oil ethyl esters: A randomized, two-way crossover pharmacokinetic study
×
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