Modifying the Health Star Rating nutrient profiling algorithm to account for ultra‐processing.
Aim: To modify the Australian and New Zealand Health Star Rating to account for ultra‐processing and compare the alignment of the modified ratings with NOVA classifications and the current Australian Dietary Guidelines classifications of core (recommended foods) and discretionary (foods to limit). M...
| Publicado en: | Nutrition & Dietetics Vol. 82; no. 1; pp. 53 - 64 |
|---|---|
| Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
| Formato: | research tables/charts Journal Article |
| Publicado: |
Wiley-Blackwell
Feb2025
|
| Acceso en línea: | Ver este registro en EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ccm&AN=183922385&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: ccm uiTerm: 183922385 longDbName: CINAHL Complete uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: dissinfo: jinfo: jid: 14466368 QMK jtl: Nutrition & Dietetics issn: 14466368 maglogo: Y pubinfo: dt: Feb2025 vid: 82 iid: 1 pid: 480 pub: Wiley-Blackwell place: Malden, Massachusetts artinfo: ui: 183922385 178330709 183922385 183922385 10.1111/1747-0080.12892 183922385 ppf: 53 ppct: 11 formats: fmt: – @attributes: type: T – @attributes: type: C – @attributes: type: P tig: atl: Modifying the Health Star Rating nutrient profiling algorithm to account for ultra‐processing. aug: au: Barrett, Eden M. Pettigrew, Simone Neal, Bruce Rayner, Mike Coyle, Daisy H. Jones, Alexandra Maganja, Damian Gaines, Allison Mozaffarian, Dariush Taylor, Fraser Ghammachi, Nadine Wu, Jason H. Y. affil: The George Institute for Global Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney New South Wales,, Australia sug: subj: Food, Commercially Packaged Health Food Nutritive Value Food Labeling Standards Algorithms Food Industry Australia Food Industry New Zealand Nutrition Policy Classification Human Cross Sectional Studies Australia New Zealand Access to Healthy Foods Government Regulations Food Supply Funding Source ab: Aim: To modify the Australian and New Zealand Health Star Rating to account for ultra‐processing and compare the alignment of the modified ratings with NOVA classifications and the current Australian Dietary Guidelines classifications of core (recommended foods) and discretionary (foods to limit). Methods: Data was cross‐sectionally analysed for 25 486 products. Four approaches were compared to the original Health Star Rating: (1) five 'negative' points added to ultra‐processed products (modification 1; inclusion approach); (2) ultra‐processed products restricted to a maximum of 3.0 Health Stars (modification 2; capping approach); (3 and 4) same approach used for modifications 1 and 2 but only applied to products that already exceeded 10 'negative' points from existing Health Star Rating attributes (modifications 3 and 4, respectively; hybrid approaches). Alignment occurred when products (i) received <3.5 Health Stars and were NOVA group 4 (for NOVA comparison) or discretionary (for Dietary Guidelines comparison), or (ii) received ≥3.5 Health Stars and were NOVA groups 1–3 or core. Results: All Health Star Rating modifications resulted in greater alignment with NOVA (ranging from 69% to 88%) compared to the original Health Star Rating (66%). None of the modifications resulted in greater alignment to the Dietary Guidelines classifications overall (69% to 76%, compared with 77% for the original Health Star Rating), but alignment varied considerably by food category. Conclusions: If ultra‐processing were incorporated into the Australian and New Zealand Health Star Rating, consideration of ultra‐processing within the broader dietary guidance framework would be essential to ensure coherent dietary messaging to Australians. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: research tables/charts Journal Article ougenre: Article language: English refInfo: holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|