4.6 Review

Use of Dietary Indexes among Children in Developed Countries

Journal

ADVANCES IN NUTRITION
Volume 2, Issue 4, Pages 295-303

Publisher

AMER SOC NUTRITION-ASN
DOI: 10.3945/an.110.000166

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In this article, we review studies that have used dietary indexes to assess different aspects of diet in relation to health outcomes and sociodemographic factors in childhood populations of developed countries. Eighty-four papers published from 1980 to mid-2010 including 90 unique dietary indexes were reviewed. Seventy-two indexes were developed (or have been adapted) specifically for childhood populations; 38 of these were used to assess diet-disease associations, mostly of diet and obesity. In the majority of these studies, small inverse associations between dietary indexes and obesity indexes were shown. Children who were younger, female, and from high-income families had better dietary quality scores. Forty-nine indexes (of 90) were compared with other aspects of dietary intakes or behaviors, with correlations ranging from very low to modest (similar to r = 0.05-0.50). Only 2 validation studies compared an index with nutritional biomarkers, and correlations were quite weak for most plasma nutrients (P < 0.10). Overall, a large number of indexes have been created and used, but the majority of studies are descriptive. Fewer analytic studies on index-health associations have been performed, and most analyses insufficiently adjusted for confounders. Thus, prospective and intervention research in diverse populations is needed to further test these tools. In conclusion, indexes are potentially useful methods for dietary assessment, because they offer valuable information on overall dietary patterns in children. However, understanding the advantages and limitations when applying them in research and public health settings is important, and more research is needed to further develop their utility. Adv. Nutr. 2: 295-303, 2011.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available