Examining the nutritional quality of the product portfolios of major packaged food and beverage companies in Canada
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Canada's food supply is abundant in energy-dense products containing excess amounts of sodium, saturated fat and free sugars, increasing Canadians' risk of developing obesity and non-communicable diseases. Food companies shape the food supply through their control over the formulation of their products; however, no studies have examined the healthfulness of products offered by different companies in Canada. This study aimed to assess and compare the nutritional quality of the product portfolios of major packaged food and beverage companies in Canada. Twenty-two top food companies were selected for study, representing a combined 50% and 73% of Canadian packaged food and beverage sales in 2018, respectively. This included 18 multinational companies, 2 Canadian manufacturers and 2 retailers with private-label brands. Nutritional information for products was sourced from the University of Toronto Food Label Information Program 2017 database. The nutritional quality of all products offered by the sampled companies that were included in the database (n = 8,211) were evaluated using the Health Star Rating (HSR) system, with HSRs ranging from 0.5 (less healthy) to 5 (healthier). Descriptive analyses and analysis of variance with post-hoc tests examined the HSRs of each company's products overall and by food category (n = 24). Mean HSRs of companies’ overall product portfolios ranged from 1.8 to 3.7 (μ x̅ = 2.7, σ x̅ = 0.5) and differed significantly between companies ( p < 0.001). Mean HSRs differed between companies for all food categories except eggs ( p = 0.5), seafood ( p = 0.2), legumes ( p = 0.1), nuts and seeds ( p = 0.4), and vegetables ( p = 0.08). Variation in mean HSRs of products offered by different companies was greatest for beverages (range = 1.3–5.0, μ x̅ = 2.0, σ x̅ = 1.0), fats/oils (range = 0.7–4.4, μ x̅ = 3.6, σ x̅ = 1.6), fruit/fruit juices (range = 0.8–4.0, μ x̅ = 2.6, σ x̅ = 0.9), and sauces/dips/gravies/condiments (range = 0.5–3.4, μ x̅ = 2.3, σ x̅ = 1.0). These findings demonstrate that the nutritional quality of products offered by leading food manufacturers in Canada varies significantly overall and by food category, with many of these products considered less healthy according to the HSR system. Differences between companies may reflect the nature of their products; for example, products offered by dairy companies were healthier than those of confectionary and soft drink manufacturers, on average. Variation in nutritional quality within food categories illustrates the need and potential for many companies to improve the healthfulness of their products. By identifying companies that offer less healthy products compared with others in Canada, this study may prompt reformulation.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».