Carrad Amy M, Louie Jimmy Chun Yu, Yeatman Heather R, Dunford Elizabeth K, Neal Bruce C, Flood Victoria M
1School of Health & Society,University of Wollongong,Wollongong,New South Wales,Australia.
2School of Molecular Bioscience, Faculty of Science,University of Sydney,Level 4 East,The Hub,D17 Charles Perkins Centre,The University of Sydney,NSW 2006,Australia.
Public Health Nutr. 2016 Aug;19(12):2165-74. doi: 10.1017/S1368980015002748. Epub 2015 Sep 28.
To compare two front-of-pack nutrition labelling systems for the assessment of packaged foods and drinks with Australian Dietary Guidelines.
A cross-sectional nutrient profiling assessment. Food and drink products (n 20 225) were categorised into scoring levels using criteria for the Institute of Medicine (IOM) three-star system and the five-star Australian Health Star Rating (HSR). The effectiveness of these systems to categorise foods in accordance with Australian Dietary Guidelines was explored.
The study was conducted in Australia, using a comprehensive food database.
Packaged food and drink products (n 20 225) available in Australia.
Using the IOM three-star system, the majority (55 %) of products scored the minimum 0 points and 25·5 % scored the maximum 3 points. Using HSR criteria, the greatest proportion of products (15·2 %) scored three-and-a-half stars from a possible five and 12·5 % received the lowest rating of a half-star. Very few products (4·1 %) scored five stars. Products considered core foods and drinks in Australian Dietary Guidelines received higher scores than discretionary foods in all food categories for both labelling systems (all P<0·05; Mann-Whitney U test), with the exception of fish products using IOM three-star criteria (P=0·603). The largest discrepancies in median score between the two systems were for the food categories edible oils, convenience foods and dairy.
Both the IOM three-star and Australian HSR front-of-pack labelling systems rated packaged foods and drinks broadly in line with Australian Dietary Guidelines by assigning core foods higher ratings and discretionary foods lower ratings.
比较两种包装正面营养标签系统,以根据澳大利亚膳食指南评估包装食品和饮料。
横断面营养成分剖析评估。使用医学研究所(IOM)三星系统和澳大利亚五星健康星级评定(HSR)的标准,将食品和饮料产品(n = 20225)分类到评分等级中。探讨了这些系统根据澳大利亚膳食指南对食品进行分类的有效性。
该研究在澳大利亚进行,使用了一个综合食品数据库。
澳大利亚可获得的包装食品和饮料产品(n = 20225)。
使用IOM三星系统时,大多数产品(55%)得分为最低的0分,25.5%得分为最高的3分。使用HSR标准时,最大比例的产品(15.2%)在可能的五星中得三点半星,12.5%获得最低的半星评级。极少产品(4.1%)得五星。在两种标签系统的所有食品类别中,澳大利亚膳食指南中视为核心食品和饮料的产品得分高于 discretionary 食品(所有P<0.05;曼-惠特尼U检验),使用IOM三星标准的鱼类产品除外(P = 0.603)。两种系统之间中位数得分差异最大的是食用油、方便食品和乳制品类别。
IOM三星和澳大利亚HSR包装正面标签系统对包装食品和饮料的评级大致符合澳大利亚膳食指南,核心食品评级较高, discretionary 食品评级较低。