ArticleNutrients2026
Development and Evaluation of a Functional Food Consumption Index (FunFoCI) in Adults.
Article 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
objectivesFunctional foods are widely discussed in nutrition research, yet their consumption is rarely quantified using a standardized, food-based metric. We developed the Functional Food Consumption Index (FunFoCI) and conducted an initial evaluation of its performance in adults.
methodsIn this cross-sectional study, 500 adults (≥18 years, 286 women, 214 men) were assessed using a 210-item quantitative food frequency questionnaire (FFQ) and a 3 day food record (FR). Candidate index foods were evaluated by five experts, using a 4-point Likert scale to establish content validity, and the finalized FunFoCI comprised 100 foods across nine groups: fruits; vegetables; whole grains; legumes; nuts and oilseeds; fermented foods and products; animal-based foods; functional oils; and spices, herbal teas, and functional beverages. FunFoCI scoring used a sample distribution-based percentile approach, including modifications for zero-inflated or sparsely consumed items, followed by group-level normalization (0-1), equal weighting across nine groups, and rescaling to 0-100. FR data were used to examine the between-method feasibility of the scoring approach. The convergent validity was assessed via correlation analyses, with the Diet Quality Index-International (DQI-I) and Healthy Eating Index-2015 (HEI-2015) derived from both FFQ and FR data, and additional correlation analyses and robustness checks were conducted to examine associations among key study variables. Known group patterns were examined across sociodemographic, lifestyle, and anthropometric characteristics.
resultsContent evaluation supported index coverage (S-CVI/Ave = 0.912; S-CVI/UA = 0.877; mean modified kappa = 0.899). The mean FunFoCI total scores were 32.68 ± 11.92 (FFQ) and 13.29 ± 4.65 (FR). Participants were classified into low (32.8%,
conclusionsFunFoCI is a newly developed, expert-reviewed, food-based index with transparent, sample distribution-based scoring and normalized aggregation. Its initial evaluation supports its use for the standardized quantification of relative functional food consumption in adults, while further studies should assess the reliability and external validation criteria in other populations and study designs.
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.