Monitoring the Nutrient Composition of Food Prepared Out-of-Home in the United Kingdom: Database Development and Case Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Hand transcribing nutrient composition data from websites requires extensive human resources and is prone to error. As a result, there are limited nutrient composition data on food prepared out of the home in the United Kingdom. Such data are crucial for understanding and monitoring the out-of-home food environment, which aids policy making. Automated data collection from publicly available sources offers a potential low-resource solution to address this gap. OBJECTIVE: In this paper, we describe the first UK longitudinal nutritional database of food prepared out of the home, MenuTracker. As large chains will be required to display calorie information on their UK menus from April 2022, we also aimed to identify which chains reported their nutritional information online in November 2021. In a case study to demonstrate the utility of MenuTracker, we estimated the proportions of menu items exceeding recommended energy and nutrient intake (eg, >600 kcal per meal). METHODS: We have collated nutrient composition data of menu items sold by large chain restaurants quarterly since March 2021. Large chains were defined as those with 250 employees or more (those covered by the new calorie labeling policy) or belonging to the top 100 restaurants based on sales volume. We developed scripts in Python to automate the data collection process from business websites. Various techniques were used to harvest web data and extract data from nutritional tables in PDF format. RESULTS: Automated Python programs reduced approximately 85% of manual work, totaling 500 hours saved for each wave of data collection. As of January 2022, MenuTracker has 76,405 records from 88 large out-of-home food chains at 4 different time points (ie, March, June, September, and December) in 2021. In constructing the database, we found that one-quarter (24.5%, 256/1043) of large chains, which are likely to be subject to the United Kingdom's calorie menu labeling regulations, provided their nutritional information online in November 2021. Across these chains, 24.7% (16,391/66,295) of menu items exceeded the UK government's recommendation of a maximum of 600 kcal for a single meal. Comparable figures were 46.4% (29,411/63,416) for saturated fat, 34.7% (21,964/63,388) for total fat, 17.6% (11,260/64,051) for carbohydrates, 17.8% (11,434/64,059) for sugar, and 35.2% (22,588/64,086) for salt. Furthermore, 0.7% to 7.1% of the menu items exceeded the maximum daily recommended intake for these nutrients. CONCLUSIONS: MenuTracker is a valuable resource that harnesses the power of data science techniques to use publicly available data online. Researchers, policy makers, and consumers can use MenuTracker to understand and assess foods available from out-of-home food outlets. The methods used in development are available online and can be used to establish similar databases elsewhere.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".