Backman Bettina, Adam Meg, Chan Jasmine, Marshall Josephine, Rosewarne Emalie, Sacks Gary, Cameron Adrian J, Blake Miranda R
Deakin University, Global Centre for Preventive Health and Nutrition (GLOBE), Institute for Health Transformation, Geelong, VIC3220, Australia.
Deakin University, Institute for Physical Activity and Nutrition, Geelong, VIC3220, Australia.
Public Health Nutr. 2025 Feb 3;28(1):e47. doi: 10.1017/S1368980025000059.
To investigate the concordance between Australian government guidelines for classifying the healthiness of foods across various public settings.
Commonly available products in Australian food service settings across eight food categories were classified according to each of the seventeen Australian state and territory food classification guidelines applying to public schools, workplaces and healthcare settings. Product nutrition information was retrieved from online sources. The level of concordance between each pair of guidelines was determined by the proportion of products rated at the same level of healthiness.
Australia.
No human participants.
Approximately half (56 %) of the 967 food and drink products assessed were classified as the same level of healthiness across all fifteen 'traffic light'-based systems. Within each setting type (e.g. schools), pairwise concordance in product classifications between guidelines ranged from 74 % to 100 %. 'Vegetables' (100 %) and 'sweet snacks and desserts' (78 %) had the highest concordance across guidelines, while 'cold ready-to-eat foods' (0 %) and 'savoury snacks' (23 %) had the lowest concordance. In addition to differences in classification criteria, discrepancies between guidelines arose from different approaches to grouping of products. The largest proportion of discrepancies (58 %) were attributed to whether products were classified as 'Red' (least healthy) or 'Amber' (moderately healthy).
The results indicate only moderate concordance between all guidelines. National coordination to create evidence-based consistency between guidelines would help provide clarity for food businesses, which are often national, on how to better support community health through product development and reformulation.
调查澳大利亚政府针对各类公共场所食品健康程度分类指南之间的一致性。
根据适用于公立学校、工作场所和医疗保健场所的澳大利亚17个州和领地的食品分类指南，对澳大利亚食品服务场所中八个食品类别的常见产品进行分类。产品营养信息从在线来源获取。通过对健康程度评级相同的产品比例来确定每对指南之间的一致程度。
澳大利亚。
无人类参与者。
在所有基于“红绿灯”的系统中，评估的967种食品和饮料产品中约有一半（56%）被归类为相同的健康程度。在每种场所类型（如学校）内，指南之间产品分类的两两一致性范围为74%至100%。“蔬菜”（100%）和“甜零食及甜点”（78%）在各指南间的一致性最高，而“即食冷食”（0%）和“咸味零食”（23%）的一致性最低。除了分类标准的差异外，指南之间的差异还源于产品分组的不同方法。最大比例的差异（58%）归因于产品被归类为“红色”（最不健康）还是“琥珀色”（中等健康）。
结果表明所有指南之间只有适度的一致性。进行全国协调以使指南之间基于证据保持一致，将有助于为通常是全国性的食品企业提供明确指导，告知它们如何通过产品开发和重新配方更好地支持社区健康。
