Blog
About

1
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Diet quality indices for research in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Context

          Dietary intake research has increasingly focused on improving diet quality in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Accompanying this is the need for sound metrics to assess diet quality.

          Objective

          This systematic literature review aims to describe existing diet quality indices for general populations and highlights recommendations for developing such indices for food system research in LMICs.

          Data sources

          Three electronic databases were searched for papers published between January 2008 and December 2017.

          Data extraction

          Articles published in English and describing the development of an index to measure overall diet quality, irrespective of whether they were for high-income countries or LMICs, were included.

          Data analysis

          Eighty-one indices were identified, over two thirds were based on national dietary guidelines from high-income countries. Of the 3 key diet quality dimensions, “diversity” was included in all 18 indices developed for LMICs, “moderation” was captured by most, and “nutrient adequacy” was included 4 times.

          Conclusions

          Indices need to be developed that include all dimensions, include foods and/or food groups rather than nutrients, use an optimal range for individual components in the score, and express the intake of healthy and unhealthy components separately. Importantly, validation of the index should be part of its development.

          Related collections

          Most cited references 125

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Maternal and child undernutrition and overweight in low-income and middle-income countries.

          Maternal and child malnutrition in low-income and middle-income countries encompasses both undernutrition and a growing problem with overweight and obesity. Low body-mass index, indicative of maternal undernutrition, has declined somewhat in the past two decades but continues to be prevalent in Asia and Africa. Prevalence of maternal overweight has had a steady increase since 1980 and exceeds that of underweight in all regions. Prevalence of stunting of linear growth of children younger than 5 years has decreased during the past two decades, but is higher in south Asia and sub-Saharan Africa than elsewhere and globally affected at least 165 million children in 2011; wasting affected at least 52 million children. Deficiencies of vitamin A and zinc result in deaths; deficiencies of iodine and iron, together with stunting, can contribute to children not reaching their developmental potential. Maternal undernutrition contributes to fetal growth restriction, which increases the risk of neonatal deaths and, for survivors, of stunting by 2 years of age. Suboptimum breastfeeding results in an increased risk for mortality in the first 2 years of life. We estimate that undernutrition in the aggregate--including fetal growth restriction, stunting, wasting, and deficiencies of vitamin A and zinc along with suboptimum breastfeeding--is a cause of 3·1 million child deaths annually or 45% of all child deaths in 2011. Maternal overweight and obesity result in increased maternal morbidity and infant mortality. Childhood overweight is becoming an increasingly important contributor to adult obesity, diabetes, and non-communicable diseases. The high present and future disease burden caused by malnutrition in women of reproductive age, pregnancy, and children in the first 2 years of life should lead to interventions focused on these groups. Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Global, regional, and national comparative risk assessment of 84 behavioural, environmental and occupational, and metabolic risks or clusters of risks, 1990–2016: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2016

            Summary Background The Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study 2016 (GBD 2016) provides a comprehensive assessment of risk factor exposure and attributable burden of disease. By providing estimates over a long time series, this study can monitor risk exposure trends critical to health surveillance and inform policy debates on the importance of addressing risks in context. Methods We used the comparative risk assessment framework developed for previous iterations of GBD to estimate levels and trends in exposure, attributable deaths, and attributable disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs), by age group, sex, year, and location for 84 behavioural, environmental and occupational, and metabolic risks or clusters of risks from 1990 to 2016. This study included 481 risk-outcome pairs that met the GBD study criteria for convincing or probable evidence of causation. We extracted relative risk (RR) and exposure estimates from 22 717 randomised controlled trials, cohorts, pooled cohorts, household surveys, census data, satellite data, and other sources, according to the GBD 2016 source counting methods. Using the counterfactual scenario of theoretical minimum risk exposure level (TMREL), we estimated the portion of deaths and DALYs that could be attributed to a given risk. Finally, we explored four drivers of trends in attributable burden: population growth, population ageing, trends in risk exposure, and all other factors combined. Findings Since 1990, exposure increased significantly for 30 risks, did not change significantly for four risks, and decreased significantly for 31 risks. Among risks that are leading causes of burden of disease, child growth failure and household air pollution showed the most significant declines, while metabolic risks, such as body-mass index and high fasting plasma glucose, showed significant increases. In 2016, at Level 3 of the hierarchy, the three leading risk factors in terms of attributable DALYs at the global level for men were smoking (124·1 million DALYs [95% UI 111·2 million to 137·0 million]), high systolic blood pressure (122·2 million DALYs [110·3 million to 133·3 million], and low birthweight and short gestation (83·0 million DALYs [78·3 million to 87·7 million]), and for women, were high systolic blood pressure (89·9 million DALYs [80·9 million to 98·2 million]), high body-mass index (64·8 million DALYs [44·4 million to 87·6 million]), and high fasting plasma glucose (63·8 million DALYs [53·2 million to 76·3 million]). In 2016 in 113 countries, the leading risk factor in terms of attributable DALYs was a metabolic risk factor. Smoking remained among the leading five risk factors for DALYs for 109 countries, while low birthweight and short gestation was the leading risk factor for DALYs in 38 countries, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia. In terms of important drivers of change in trends of burden attributable to risk factors, between 2006 and 2016 exposure to risks explains an 9·3% (6·9–11·6) decline in deaths and a 10·8% (8·3–13·1) decrease in DALYs at the global level, while population ageing accounts for 14·9% (12·7–17·5) of deaths and 6·2% (3·9–8·7) of DALYs, and population growth for 12·4% (10·1–14·9) of deaths and 12·4% (10·1–14·9) of DALYs. The largest contribution of trends in risk exposure to disease burden is seen between ages 1 year and 4 years, where a decline of 27·3% (24·9–29·7) of the change in DALYs between 2006 and 2016 can be attributed to declines in exposure to risks. Interpretation Increasingly detailed understanding of the trends in risk exposure and the RRs for each risk-outcome pair provide insights into both the magnitude of health loss attributable to risks and how modification of risk exposure has contributed to health trends. Metabolic risks warrant particular policy attention, due to their large contribution to global disease burden, increasing trends, and variable patterns across countries at the same level of development. GBD 2016 findings show that, while it has huge potential to improve health, risk modification has played a relatively small part in the past decade. Funding The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Bloomberg Philanthropies.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Update of the Healthy Eating Index: HEI-2010.

              The Healthy Eating Index (HEI) is a measure of diet quality in terms of conformance with federal dietary guidance. Publication of the 2010 Dietary Guidelines for Americans prompted an interagency working group to update the HEI. The HEI-2010 retains several features of the 2005 version: (a) it has 12 components, many unchanged, including nine adequacy and three moderation components; (b) it uses a density approach to set standards, eg, per 1,000 calories or as a percentage of calories; and (c) it employs least-restrictive standards; ie, those that are easiest to achieve among recommendations that vary by energy level, sex, and/or age. Changes to the index include: (a) the Greens and Beans component replaces Dark Green and Orange Vegetables and Legumes; (b) Seafood and Plant Proteins has been added to capture specific choices from the protein group; (c) Fatty Acids, a ratio of polyunsaturated and monounsaturated to saturated fatty acids, replaces Oils and Saturated Fat to acknowledge the recommendation to replace saturated fat with monounsaturated and polyunsaturated fatty acids; and (d) a moderation component, Refined Grains, replaces the adequacy component, Total Grains, to assess overconsumption. The HEI-2010 captures the key recommendations of the 2010 Dietary Guidelines and, like earlier versions, will be used to assess the diet quality of the US population and subpopulations, evaluate interventions, research dietary patterns, and evaluate various aspects of the food environment. Copyright © 2013 Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Nutr Rev
                Nutr. Rev
                nutritionreviews
                Nutrition Reviews
                Oxford University Press
                0029-6643
                1753-4887
                August 2019
                25 May 2019
                25 May 2019
                : 77
                : 8
                : 515-540
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Division of Human Nutrition, Wageningen University, Wageningen, the Netherlands
                [2 ]Bioversity International, Rome, Italy
                Author notes
                Division of Human Nutrition, Wageningen University, PO Box 17, 6700 AA Wageningen, the Netherlands. E-mail: laura.trijsburg@ 123456wur.nl .
                Article
                nuz017
                10.1093/nutrit/nuz017
                6609420
                31127835
                © The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the International Life Sciences Institute.

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs licence ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial reproduction and distribution of the work, in any medium, provided the original work is not altered or transformed in any way, and that the work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contactjournals.permissions@oup.com

                Page count
                Pages: 26
                Product
                Funding
                Funded by: International Food Policy Research Institute
                Categories
                Lead Article

                Comments

                Comment on this article