Marchese Laura E, McNaughton Sarah A, Hendrie Gilly A, Wingrove Kate, Dickinson Kacie M, Livingstone Katherine M
Institute for Physical Activity and Nutrition, School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Deakin University, Geelong, Australia.
CSIRO Health and Biosecurity, Adelaide, Australia.
Curr Dev Nutr. 2023 Feb 28;7(4):100061. doi: 10.1016/j.cdnut.2023.100061. eCollection 2023 Apr.
Plant-based dietary patterns are comprised of a range of foods, and increasingly, diet quality indices are used to assess them and their associations with health outcomes. As the design of these indices varies, a review of existing indices is necessary to identify common features, strengths, and considerations. This scoping review aimed to synthesize the literature on plant-based diet quality indices by examining their ) basis for development, ) scoring methodology, and ) validation approaches. MEDLINE, CINAHL, and Global Health databases were systematically searched from 1980 to 2022. Observational studies were included if they assessed plant-based diets in adults, using an methodology with food-based components. Studies conducted among pregnant/lactating people were excluded. Thirty-five unique plant-based diet quality indices were identified in 137 included articles published between 2007 and 2022. Indices were developed to reflect epidemiological evidence for associations between foods and health outcomes ( = 16 indices), previous diet quality indices ( = 16), country-specific dietary guidelines ( = 9), or foods from traditional dietary patterns ( = 6). Indices included 4 to 33 food groups, with fruits ( = 32), vegetables ( = 32), and grains ( = 30) the most common. Index scoring comprised of population-specific percentile cutoffs ( = 18) and normative cutoffs ( = 13). Twenty indices differentiated between healthy and less healthy plant-based foods when scoring intakes. Validation methods included construct validity ( = 26), reliability ( = 20), and criterion validity ( = 5). This review highlights that most plant-based diet quality indices were derived from epidemiological research, the majority of indices differentially scored healthy and unhealthy plant and animal foods, and indices were most often evaluated for construct validity and reliability. To ensure best practice use and reporting of plant-based dietary patterns, researchers should consider the basis for development, methodology, and validation when identifying appropriate plant-based diet quality indices for use in research contexts.
以植物为基础的饮食模式由一系列食物组成,并且越来越多地使用饮食质量指数来评估它们以及它们与健康结果的关联。由于这些指数的设计各不相同,因此有必要对现有指数进行综述,以确定其共同特征、优势和注意事项。本范围综述旨在通过研究植物性饮食质量指数的(1)发展基础、(2)评分方法和(3)验证方法,综合有关这些指数的文献。对1980年至2022年期间的MEDLINE、CINAHL和全球健康数据库进行了系统检索。如果观察性研究使用基于食物成分的方法评估成年人的植物性饮食,则纳入该研究。排除在孕妇/哺乳期妇女中进行的研究。在2007年至2022年发表的137篇纳入文章中,确定了35个独特的植物性饮食质量指数。这些指数的制定是为了反映食物与健康结果之间关联的流行病学证据(n = 16个指数)、先前的饮食质量指数(n = 16)、特定国家的饮食指南(n = 9)或传统饮食模式中的食物(n = 6)。指数包括4至33个食物组,其中水果(n = 32)、蔬菜(n = 32)和谷物(n = 30)最为常见。指数评分包括针对特定人群的百分位数截断值(n = 18)和标准截断值(n = 13)。20个指数在对摄入量进行评分时区分了健康和不太健康的植物性食物。验证方法包括结构效度(n = 26)、信度(n = 20)和效标效度(n = 5)。本综述强调,大多数植物性饮食质量指数源自流行病学研究,大多数指数对健康和不健康的植物性及动物性食物进行了差异化评分,并且指数最常针对结构效度和信度进行评估。为确保以最佳方式使用和报告植物性饮食模式,研究人员在确定适用于研究背景的植物性饮食质量指数时,应考虑其发展基础、方法和验证。