Trial reportNutrients2022
Comparison of Discretionary Food and Drink Intake Based on a Short Web-Based Sugar-Rich Food Screener and a Validated Web-Based 7-Day Dietary Record.
Trial report in Nutrients, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Reduction in intake of discretionary foods and drinks among Danish schoolchildren: dietary results from the real-life cluster-randomised controlled trial 'Are You Too Sweet?'Public health nutrition · 2024Trial
- Article
- Discretionary foods and drinks in Norwegian children and adolescents' diet: data from the national dietary survey Ungkost 3.Public health nutrition · 2023Article
- A Qualitative Evaluation of Social Aspects of Sugar-Rich Food and Drink Intake and Parental Strategies for Reductions.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Evaluation of Parental Acceptability and Use of Intervention Components to Reduce Pre-School Children's Intake of Sugar-Rich Food and Drinks.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
A high consumption of discretionary foods and drinks has been associated with increased risk of multiple adverse health outcomes, including risk of overweight and dental caries. The family-based cluster randomized intervention study “Are you too sweet?” aimed at reducing the intake of discretionary foods and drinks in a population of children starting pre-school. As part of the intervention a new short web-based sugar-rich food screener (SRFS), was developed to make the parents and the school health nurses aware of the children’s intake of discretionary foods and drinks. In addition to the short assessment tool the parents also completed a validated web-based 7-day dietary record for the children. In the present study, estimates for intake of discretionary foods and drinks from the two assessment tools were compared (n = 80). There was significant correlation between estimates from the two assessment tools, but the SRFS provided lower estimates for intake of discretionary foods and drinks compared to the 7-day dietary record. The correlation coefficient between the two assessment tools was 0.49 (p < 0.001) and Kappa coefficient was 0.33. It is concluded that the SRFS can provide a fairly ranking of participants according to their intake of discretionary foods and drinks when compared to a validated 7-day dietary record. The screener may be a useful tool in practical settings, such as school health nurse consultations, in order to gain insight into the child’s sweet intake habits.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.