ArticleFrontiers in nutrition2024
Procedure to identify fortified foods in the Dutch branded food database.
Article in Frontiers in nutrition, 2024. 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.
- Article
- Diversity of dietary protein patterns across Europe - Impact on nutritional quality and environmental sustainability.Current research in food science · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Information on fortified foods is needed for multiple purposes, including food consumption research and dietary advice. Branded food databases are a valuable source of food label data. European labeling legislation prescribes that food fortification should be indicated in the ingredient list, and nutrient values should be declared under certain conditions. This creates the potential to identify fortified foods in branded food databases, though it is not straightforward and labor-intensive. The aim of our study was to develop an automated approach to identify fortified foods in the Dutch branded food database called LEDA. Methods: An automated procedure, based on a stepwise approach conforming with European labeling legislation, using a list of rules and search terms, was developed to identify fortified foods. Fortification with calcium, folic acid, vitamin B12, and zinc was studied as an example. The results of a random stratified sample with fortified and not-fortified foods were validated by two experts. Results: The automated approach resulted in identifying 1,817 foods fortified with one or more of the selected nutrients in the LEDA dataset (0.94%). The proportions of fortified foods per nutrient were below 0.7%. The classification of fortified/non-fortified foods matched manual validation by experts for the majority of the foods in the sample, i.e., sensitivity and specificity indicating the probability of correctly identifying fortified and non-fortified foods was high (>94.0%). Conclusion: The automated approach is capable of easily and quickly identifying fortified foods in the Dutch branded food database with high accuracy, although some improvements to the automated procedure could be made. In addition, the completeness, correctness, and consistency of the LEDA database can be improved. To fully benefit from this automated approach, it needs to be expanded to cover all micronutrients that may be added to foods.
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.