ArticlePublic health nutrition2023
A comparative analysis of nutrition-related assessment criteria and associated nutrition performance scores of food companies across three prominent corporate sustainability assessment tools.
Article in Public health nutrition, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Do ESG Frameworks Capture Corporate Health Impacts? An Analysis of the Food and Beverage Industry.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025Article
- Proposed best-practice nutrition-related corporate reporting metrics for Australian food manufacturers, quick-service restaurants and retailers.Public health nutrition · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveCorporate sustainability assessment tools are increasingly used to evaluate company performance on environmental, social and governance (ESG) criteria. Given the growing burden of diet-related disease and nutrition-related business risks, it is important to understand the scope of nutrition-related ESG data currently available. This study aimed to compare the nutrition-related assessment criteria and associated food company performance across three prominent assessment tools.
designKey attributes and assessment criteria of two civil society-led and one commercially available corporate sustainability assessment tools were extracted and compared for the year 2021. Company performance scores for twenty-five major food and beverage manufacturers using these three tools were analysed by nutrition domain: 'Product Portfolio', 'Labelling', 'Marketing', 'Accessibility and Affordability', 'Governance and Reporting', 'Stakeholder Engagement' and 'Employee Health'. To enable comparison between tools, company performance scores were assigned to categories of
settingGlobal.
participantsN/A.
resultsThe tools covered similar nutrition domains; however, there was heterogeneity in the assessment criteria used to evaluate each domain. When applied to assess the performance of twenty-five major food and beverage manufacturers, a median nutrition-related performance score of
conclusionsGreater standardisation of the nutrition-related criteria against which food companies are assessed is needed as part of efforts to drive improvements in food company practices.
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.