ArticleThe American journal of clinical nutrition2026
What is "healthy" food? A cross-sectional evaluation of foods and beverages consumed by United States adults that satisfy the United States Food and Drug Administration's updated "healthy" claim criteria.
Article in The American journal of clinical nutrition, 2026. 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.
- Finding the sweet spot in green nephrology: the intersection of environmental sustainability and excellence in patient care.Clinical kidney journal · 2026Review
- Trends in "Healthy" Food Consumption Overall and by Nova Food Processing Categories among United States Adults from 2003 to March 2020.The Journal of nutrition · 2026Article
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
Abstract
backgroundThe Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recently updated criteria for the "healthy" claim displayed on foods and beverages in the United States. However, it is unknown how updated criteria compare with existing methods for evaluating the healthfulness of foods and beverages.
objectivesTo evaluate correlation between "healthy" criteria and 3 nutrient profiling models used to evaluate food and beverage healthfulness, and with Nova food processing classification. Exploratory analyses compare the nutritional profile of "healthy" items and items not meeting "healthy" criteria.
methodsIn this cross-sectional analysis, we identified individual "healthy" items reported in the 2017-2018 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. We used descriptive statistics to characterize "healthy" items across food categories, nutrient profiling models (Food Compass 2.0, Nutri-Score, and Health Star Rating), and Nova. We used point-biserial correlation to evaluate correlation between FDA criteria and nutrient profiling models, and rank point-biserial correlation to evaluate correlation with Nova. We used t-tests to compare nutrient content of "healthy" items and items not meeting "healthy" criteria across food categories and Nova categories.
resultsOverall, 14.9% of items qualified for the "healthy" claim. Although the majority of fruits (60.9%), vegetables (59.6%), and nuts and seeds (68.8%) qualified, few meat, poultry, and eggs (3.0%), grains (4.8%), or savory snacks and desserts (1.3%) met criteria. Criteria were moderately correlated with Food Compass 2.0 (r = 0.56), Nutri-Score (r = 0.46), Health Star Rating (r = 0.41), and Nova (0.49). "Healthy" items were lower in saturated fat and sodium and higher in fiber and vitamin C across nearly all food categories and Nova categories.
conclusionsFindings suggest few foods met "healthy" criteria. Moderate correlations between "healthy" criteria, Nova, and validated nutrient profiling models provide evidence of convergent validity, yet underscore the challenge of classifying foods by healthfulness, and highlight uncertainty about whether discrepancies reflect real differences in model performance and food healthfulness.
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.