4.6 Article

Food composition data: Identifying new uses, approaching new users

期刊

JOURNAL OF FOOD COMPOSITION AND ANALYSIS
卷 24, 期 4-5, 页码 727-731

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.jfca.2011.03.001

关键词

Food data; Food information; Innovation; Consumer; Education; Interface; eSearch facility; Communication; EuroFIR; Food composition

资金

  1. EU [FOOD-CT-2005-513944]
  2. BBSRC [BBS/E/F/00044466] Funding Source: UKRI
  3. Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council [BBS/E/F/00041903, BBS/E/F/00044466] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Food composition data (FCD) are fundamental for nutrition science and also extensively used in the public health domain. Advances in information technologies allowing rapid transmission of large data volumes likely will foster the development of new FCD uses and in the future FCD could be retrieved any time and location-independent (e.g. in supermarket and restaurants) through the use of mobile or stationary devices having incorporated Internet access. To achieve this, FCD need to be standardised and available on the Internet, two requirements towards which the Network of Excellence EuroFIR has already substantially contributed. The technology needed for the implementation of FCD into innovative interfaces, either mobile or stationary, is already available and allows for sufficiently rapid data transfer. Improved data coverage and quality as well as standardised availability and accessibility, allowing easier data interchange, will further facilitate new FCD uses providing a maximum of user-relevant data and meeting users' requirements. Next to classical uses, FCD could also easily be incorporated to a greater extent in educational or entertainment tools, which would respond to the call of the World Health Organization and European Commission for the dissemination and development of new activities in the fields of nutrition, physical activities and health. (C) 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据