Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26860262›Full record

ArticleEnvironmental health : a global access science source2016

Diet-related greenhouse gas emissions assessed by a food frequency questionnaire and validated using 7-day weighed food records.

Camilla Sjörs, Sara E Raposo, Arvid Sjölander, Olle Bälter, Fredrik Hedenus, Katarina Bälter

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Environmental health : a global access science source, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 12% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 36 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Camilla SjörsDepartment of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, SE-171 77, Stockholm, Sweden. Camilla.Sjors@ki.se.
Sara E RaposoDepartment of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, SE-171 77, Stockholm, Sweden. Sara.Raposo@ki.se.
Arvid SjölanderDepartment of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, SE-171 77, Stockholm, Sweden. Arvid.Sjolander@ki.se.
Olle BälterKTH - Royal Institute of Technology, School of Computer Science and Communication, SE-100 44, Stockholm, Sweden. ob1@kth.se.
Fredrik HedenusDepartment of Energy and Environment, Chalmers University of Technology, SE-412 96, Gothenburg, Sweden. Hedenus@chalmers.se.
Katarina BälterDepartment of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, SE-171 77, Stockholm, Sweden. Katarina.Balter@ki.se.
Karolinska Institutet · SEChalmers University of Technology · SEKTH Royal Institute of Technology · SE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe current food system generates about 25 % of total greenhouse gas emissions (GHGE), including deforestation, and thereby substantially contributes to the warming of the earth's surface. To understand the association between food and nutrient intake and GHGE, we therefore need valid methods to assess diet-related GHGE in observational studies.

methodsLife cycle assessment (LCA) studies assess the environmental impact of different food items. We linked LCA data expressed as kg carbon dioxide equivalents (CO2e) per kg food product to data on food intake assessed by the food frequency questionnaire (FFQ) Meal-Q and validated it against a 7-day weighed food record (WFR). 166 male and female volunteers aged 20-63 years completed Meal-Q and the WFR, and their food intake was linked to LCA data.

resultsThe mean GHGE assessed with Meal-Q was 3.76 kg CO2e per day and person, whereas it was 5.04 kg CO2e using the WFR. The energy-adjusted and deattenuated Pearson and Spearman correlation coefficients were 0.68 and 0.70, respectively. Moreover, compared to the WFR, Meal-Q provided a good ranking ability, with 90 % of the participants classified into the same or adjacent quartile according to their daily average CO2e. The Bland-Altman plot showed an acceptable level of agreement between the two methods and the reproducibility of Meal-Q was high.

conclusionsThis is the first study validating the assessment of diet-related GHGE by a questionnaire. The results suggest that Meal-Q is a useful tool for studying the link between food habits and CO2e in future epidemiological studies.

Indexed as

Feeding BehaviorFood PreferencesAdultCarbon DioxideDietary CarbohydratesDietary FatsDietary ProteinsDiet SurveysFemaleGreenhouse EffectHumansMaleMiddle AgedRecommended Dietary AllowancesSurveys and QuestionnairesYoung AdultCarbon DioxideDietary CarbohydratesDietary FatsDietary Proteins

Identifiers

PMID26860262
PMCPMC4748591
OpenAlexW2257866024

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.