Three food pattern-based indices diagnose lactating women's nutritional inadequacies in Argentina: A clinimetric approach using diet quality indicators and breast milk biomarkers

Scotta, Ana Verónica; Miranda, Agustín Ramiro; Cortez, Mariela Valentina; Soria, Elio Andrés

doi:10.1016/j.nutres.2022.09.007

Cited by 2 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…ELD-I and WISH exhibited the best internal consistency, while ELDS showed lower λ coefficients. Although there is no fixed rule for determining when λ is high enough, the context and researcher’s judgment are crucial, especially in nutrition, where lower coefficients are common due to the complexity of human diet [19,20,41]. Internal consistency is not strictly necessary, but knowing this property has implications for confidence in the indices [19].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Measures related to a particular phenomenon are expected to be highly correlated, suggesting that they converge and are measuring the same underlying construct [20]. Therefore, since the six indices based on the EAT-Lancet recommendations have been proposed as a measure of healthy and sustainable diets, correlations with nutritional and environmental indicators were analysed by calculating Spearman’s coefficients (ρ).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Energy and nutrient contents of foods were based on the 2016 database from the French Centre d'Information sur la Qualité des Aliments [25]. The traditional recipes or dishes containing various foods were disaggregated into their ingredients based on average recipes obtained from an existing recipe database [20], and on recipes sourced from the most popular cooking website in France (i.e., marmiton.org) [26]. The dietary data were used to calculate EAT-Lancet adherence indices, nutritional quality and environmental scores for each individual from the INCA3.…”

Section: Dietary Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…While efforts have been made to develop methods for measuring adherence to EAT-Lancet diet, further research is needed for the assessment of various measurement properties to ensure their validity and reliability [19,20]. Some indices like PHDI and ELD-I have undergone validation, but most have not reported their validity indicators.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

How do the indices based on the EAT-Lancet recommendations measure adherence to healthy and sustainable diets? A comparison of measurement performance in adults from a French national survey

Miranda,

Vieux,

Maillot

et al. 2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Measuring adherence to EAT-Lancet recommendations for healthy and sustainable diets is challenging, leading to diverse methods and a lack of consensus on standardized metrics. Available indices vary mainly in scoring systems, food components, units, energy adjustments, and cut-off points. We aimed to evaluate and compare the measurement performance of six dietary indices for assessing adherence to EAT-Lancet reference diet. Food consumption data of 1,723 adults were obtained from the French Third Individual and National Study on Food Consumption Survey (INCA3, 2014-2015). Sociodemographic, nutritional, and environmental data were used to assess the validity and reliability of dietary indices. Results showed that the four indices assessing their food components with quantitative scoring captured dietary variability, were less dependent on energy intake and converged to a large extent with nutritional indicators. While the two binary indices showed a stronger correlation with environmental indicators, one quantitative index converged with both domains. Indices had valid unidimensional structures, meaning that the combination of food components within each index accurately reflects the same construct and supporting the use of total scores. Furthermore, the indices differed between sociodemographic groups, demonstrating concurrent criterion validity. Higher scores were associated with higher nutritional quality and lower environmental impact, but with unfavourable results for zinc intake, vitamin B12 and water use. A low concordance rate (from 32% to 43%) indicated that indices categorized individuals differently. Researchers must align study objectives with the applicability, assumptions, and functional significance of chosen indices. Indices using quantitative scoring allow a global understanding of dietary health and sustainability, being advantageous in precision-focused research, such as clinical trials or epidemiological research. Conversely, indices based on binary scoring offer a simplified perspective, being valuable tools for surveys, observational studies, and public health. Recognizing their strengths and limitations is crucial for a comprehensive assessment of diets and understanding their implications.

show abstract