ArticleAnnals of the New York Academy of Sciences2025
Digital tools and technologies used in food fortification: A scoping review.
Article in Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The role of policy on fortification in food processing and value addition in Malawi and Mozambique-a systematic review.Frontiers in nutrition · 2026Pooled it
- Digital tools and technologies used in food fortification: A scoping review.Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Food fortification (i.e., industrial fortification and biofortification) increases the micronutrient content of foods to improve population nutrition. Implementing effective fortification programs requires the generation and use of data to inform decision making. The use of digital tools and technologies (DTTs) for such purposes in broader nutrition programs is growing; however, there is limited consolidation of those used in fortification. This scoping review aimed to identify and describe DTTs used in fortification programs. We searched peer-reviewed and gray literature and conducted 17 stakeholder surveys. We then mapped DTTs identified against the fortification and nutrition data value chains. Of 11,741 articles identified, 158 met the inclusion criteria. From the included articles and stakeholder surveys, 125 DTTs were identified across three categories: software and tooling (n = 58), data and information lifecycle (n = 50), and hardware and infrastructure (n = 17). Gaps were identified in processing, post-harvest storage, aggregation, and transport nodes of the fortification value chain, and data prioritization, translation/dissemination, and decision-making nodes of the nutrition data value chain. DTTs have the potential to address challenges faced by fortification stakeholders to generate and use data to improve program decision making and nutritional impact. Further work is needed to standardize terminology, identify relevant DTTs from other sectors, and explore stakeholder needs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.