Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40334787›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of nutrition2025

Performance of a Food Frequency Questionnaire for Estimating Ultraprocessed Food Intake According to the Nova Classification System in the United States NIH-AARP Diet and Health Study.

Erikka Loftfield, Pei Zhang, Caitlin P O'Connell, Lisa L Kahle, Kirsten Herrick, Leila Abar, Neha Khandpur, Eurídice Martínez Steele, Hyokyoung G Hong

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of nutrition, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Erikka LoftfieldMetabolic Epidemiology Branch, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Rockville, MD, United States. Electronic address: erikka.loftfiled@nih.gov.
Pei ZhangBiostatistics Branch, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Rockville, MD, United States.
Caitlin P O'ConnellMetabolic Epidemiology Branch, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Rockville, MD, United States.
Lisa L KahleInformation Management Services, Rockville, MD, United States.
Kirsten HerrickDivision of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, Risk Factor Assessment Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Rockville, MD, United States.
Leila AbarMetabolic Epidemiology Branch, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Rockville, MD, United States.
Neha KhandpurDivision of Human Nutrition and Health, Wageningen University, the Netherlands; Department of Nutrition, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, United States; NUPENS, University of São Paulo, Brazil; NUPENS, School of Public Health, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
Eurídice Martínez SteeleNUPENS, University of São Paulo, Brazil.
Hyokyoung G HongBiostatistics Branch, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Rockville, MD, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHow accurately ultraprocessed food (UPF) intake is measured by food frequency questionnaire (FFQ) is unknown.

objectivesWe evaluated the performance of a 124-item FFQ for estimating UPF intake with Nova.

methodsIn 1311 NIH-AARP Diet and Health Study participants who completed 2 nonconsecutive 24-hour dietary recalls (24HDR) and 2 FFQ, we used 2 methods to estimate UPF intake. First, 4 experts independently matched FFQ items to food descriptions from another FFQ classified previously according to Nova. Discordant descriptions were discussed, and a consensus reached. Second, data from the 1994-1996 Continuing Survey of Food Intake of Individuals were used to match disaggregated FFQ items to Food and Nutrient Database for Dietary Studies (FNDDS) and standard reference (SR) codes. Nova classification of FNDDS and SR codes was based on database linkage. We evaluated FFQ performance using a measurement error model with 2 24HDR as the reference to estimate validity coefficients (ρ

resultsFor energy-adjusted, kilocalories from UPF (kcal/d), ρ

conclusionsFCM, performed similarly to ECM but has the potential to standardize UPF exposures across studies because the Nova categorization is assigned at a more granular level through database linkage. UPF intake based on energy-adjusted gram weight outperformed intake based on energy alone.

Indexed as

DietDiet SurveysFood HandlingAgedDiet RecordsEnergy IntakeFeeding BehaviorFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedReproducibility of ResultsSurveys and QuestionnairesUnited Statesdietary assessmentepidemiologymeasurement error modelNovaultraprocessed food

Identifiers

PMID40334787
PMCPMC12308084

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.