ArticleThe American journal of clinical nutrition2025
Food Compass Score-10: validation of a method for evaluating the healthfulness of foods and beverages using ingredient list information.
Article in The American journal of clinical nutrition, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe Food Compass, a novel food profiling system, provides a holistic, validated assessment of the healthfulness of foods, beverages, and meals using 54 attributes across 9 domains. However, information on several of these attributes is not commonly available.
objectivesWe aimed to develop and validate an approach, Food Compass Score-10 (FCS-10), to estimate FCSs using information commonly available on package labels.
methodsMissing attributes were calculated using weighted scores of each product's ingredients, derived from a dataset of ∼10,000 foods and beverages. The final FCS-10 was scaled from 1 (least healthful) to 10 (most healthful). As part of this validation study, diagnostic accuracy analysis was conducted to evaluate the performance of the FCS-10 compared with the original score. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value were calculated by comparing the FCS-10 recommendation categorizations with the FCS recommendation categorizations (≥7 for foods to encourage, 4-6 for foods to consume in moderation, ≤3 for foods to limit).
resultsFCS-10 produced scores within 1 unit of the original score (when rescaled 1-10 for comparison) for 89% of products (n = 481/538); none deviated >2 units. The correlation between FCS-10 and the original score was high (r = 0.93). FCS-10 also performed well in identifying products to encourage, moderate, or limit, with overall sensitivity and specificity of 87% and 93%, respectively.
conclusionsFCS-10 offers a practical approach for estimating the healthfulness of diverse packaged foods and beverages using readily available label data while maintaining the strengths of the original system.
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.