ArticleThe British journal of nutrition2024
Penn Healthy Diet survey: pilot validation and scoring.
Article in The British journal of nutrition, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06142903 (THE COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS OF 7 VERSUS 21 HOME-DELIVERED MEDICALLY TAILORED MEALS TO IMPROVE MALNUTRITION RISK IN MALNOURISHED PATIENTS WITH HEART FAILURE), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 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.
The comparative effectiveness of 7 versus 21 home-delivered medically tailored meals to improve malnutrition risk in malnourished patients with heart failure: a random order crossover feeding trial (medimeals)
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Hepatic and abdominal adiposity in type 2 diabetes as assessed with machine learning on computed tomography scans.Diabetes, obesity & metabolism · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Though diet quality is widely recognised as linked to risk of chronic disease, health systems have been challenged to find a user-friendly, efficient way to obtain information about diet. The Penn Healthy Diet (PHD) survey was designed to fill this void. The purposes of this pilot project were to assess the patient experience with the PHD, to validate the accuracy of the PHD against related items in a diet recall and to explore scoring algorithms with relationship to the Healthy Eating Index (HEI)-2015 computed from the recall data. A convenience sample of participants in the Penn Health BioBank was surveyed with the PHD, the Automated Self-Administered 24-hour recall (ASA24) and experience questions. Kappa scores and Spearman correlations were used to compare related questions in the PHD to the ASA24. Numerical scoring, regression tree and weighted regressions were computed for scoring. Participants assessed the PHD as easy to use and were willing to repeat the survey at least annually. The three scoring algorithms were strongly associated with HEI-2015 scores using National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 2017-2018 data from which the PHD was developed and moderately associated with the pilot replication data. The PHD is acceptable to participants and at least moderately correlated with the HEI-2015. Further validation in a larger sample will enable the selection of the strongest scoring approach.
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.