Changes in Nutrient and Food Consumption Over Time in Populations Around the World
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Comprehensive assessments of diet trends are warranted as changes have implications for non-communicable diseases and malnutrition. This thesis aimed to estimate and compare changes in energy, macronutrients, and foods, over the long term (1950-2019) and short term (2007-2022). Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis examined changes in energy, macronutrients, and foods per decade from 1950-2019 by geographic and income regions using linear mixed-effects models. In sixteen low-, middle-, and high-income countries participating in the Prospective Urban Rural Epidemiology (PURE) Study, changes in foods were assessed (2007-2022) using mixed-effect models. In a small methodological project, we used correlation coefficients to compare trends in food supply data to dietary changes collected using individual-level diet assessments. Results: Findings from the systematic review and meta-analysis show a pattern of decreased carbohydrate and increased fat intakes in Asia; the opposite was found in North America. In Europe, fat consumption decreased, but little change was found in carbohydrate intake. By the end of the covered time period (in the 2000s), fruit, vegetable, nut, and legume intakes were below recommended intakes in most regions. In the PURE cohort, dietary changes were modest. In low-income countries, milk, chicken, fish, and fruit intakes increased, with little change to vegetable intake. Fruit decreased in high- and middle-income countries, and vegetables decreased in most regions. Food supply data overestimated individual-level intakes, especially in higher-income countries. Diet changes estimated from supply data corresponded with changes from individual-level assessments for macronutrients, but not energy intake. Conclusions: Based on our systematic review, consumption of fruits and vegetables, nuts, and legumes remain below recommendations in most world regions. Similarly, in PURE, consumption of fruits and vegetables has not improved in most regions in recent years (i.e., 2007-2022). This work helps to identify targets for nutritional policies and interventions in different world regions.
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 | 0.008 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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".