ReviewNutrients2026
Revision of the Choices Nutrient Profiling System.
Review in Nutrients, 2026. 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
objectivesPoor dietary habits are a major contributor to non-communicable diseases (NCDs), the leading cause of mortality worldwide. To promote healthier eating, governments and stakeholders have implemented various nutrition policies, including front-of-pack nutrition labeling (FOPNL). The Choices International Foundation (Choices), through its criteria, supports these efforts through its standardized nutrient profiling system (NPS). Originally developed to underpin a positive FOPNL logo, in 2021, the criteria were expanded into a globally oriented five-level profiling system covering 23 basic and 10 discretionary food groups, addressing key nutrients such as trans-fatty acids, saturated fat, sodium, sugar, fiber, and energy. To ensure continued scientific relevance, the Choices criteria are periodically reviewed by an independent International Scientific Committee (ISC).
methodsThis paper presents the 2025 revision of the Choices criteria, focusing on priority areas identified through stakeholder consultation and recent scientific developments.
resultsKey updates include the introduction of nutrient-based equivalence criteria for plant-based alternatives to meat and dairy, based on protein and selected micronutrient thresholds. Non-sugar sweeteners (NSSs) were newly included as a factor that lowers a product's health classification and makes it ineligible for a positive FOPNL. Additionally, the industrially produced trans-fatty acid (iTFA) criteria were revised and aligned with the latest World Health Organization (WHO) recommendations, improving both technical feasibility and policy coherence. While options for incorporating whole-grain and micronutrient criteria were explored, these were not included in the current revision.
conclusionsThe 2025 update system enhances the scientific rigor, policy alignment, and global applicability of the Choices system. By providing a harmonized and evidence-based tool, it aims to support national policies that foster healthier food environments and, ultimately, improve public health outcomes worldwide.
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.