ArticleCurrent developments in nutrition2025
How Do the Indices based on the EAT-Lancet Recommendations Measure Adherence to Healthy and Sustainable Diets? A Comparison of Measurement Performance in Adults from a French National Survey.
Article in Current developments in nutrition, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The Health and Environmental Impacts, Safety, and Affordability of the EAT-Lancet Planetary Health Diet: A Multidisciplinary Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Advances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.) · 2026Pooled it
- A Short Questionnaire for Evaluating Mediterranean Diet Adherence and Nutritional Sustainability: Validation in Turkish Adults.Journal of human nutrition and dietetics : the official journal of the British Dietetic Association · 2026Article
- Planetary health diet adherence and risk of cognitive-behavioral disorders in children and adolescents: a retrospective cohort study.Nutrition journal · 2026Article
- Gender-specific associations of diet quality and dietary patterns with metabolic syndrome: evidence from Korea National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (KNHANES) VI.Nutrition & metabolism · 2026Article
- Article
- Association between dietary environmental pressures and major chronic diseases: assessment from the prospective NutriNet-Santé cohort.The Lancet regional health. Europe · 2025Article
- The role of healthy diet literacy in promoting sustainable and healthy eating behaviors in Türkiye: implications for environmental health.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Mapping of the adherence to the planetary health diet in 11 European countries: comparison of different diet quality indices as a result of the PLAN'EAT project.Frontiers in nutrition · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Measuring adherence to EAT-Lancet recommendations for healthy and sustainable diets is challenging, leading to diverse methods and a lack of consensus on standardized metrics. Available indices vary mainly in scoring systems, food components, units, energy adjustments, and cut-off points. Objectives: To evaluate and compare the measurement performance of 9 dietary indices for assessing adherence to EAT-Lancet reference diet. Methods: This cross-sectional study utilized repeated 24-h dietary recall data from 1723 adults in the French Third Individual and National Study on Food Consumption Survey (INCA3, 2014-2015). Sociodemographic, nutritional, and environmental variables were analyzed to assess the validity and reliability of dietary indices. Results: The 4 indices assessing their food components with proportional scoring captured dietary variability, were less dependent on energy intake and converged to a large extent with nutritional indicators. Although the 3 binary indices showed a stronger correlation with environmental indicators, 1 proportional index converged with both domains. Indices had valid unidimensional structures, meaning that the combination of food components within each index accurately reflected the same construct, supporting the use of total scores. Furthermore, the indices differed between sociodemographic groups, demonstrating concurrent-criterion validity. Higher scores were associated with higher nutritional quality and lower environmental impact, but with unfavorable results for zinc intake, vitamin B12, and water use. A low concordance rate (32%-43%) indicated that indices categorized individuals differently. Conclusions: Researchers must align study objectives with the applicability, assumptions, and significance of chosen indices. Indices using proportional scoring allow a global understanding of dietary health and sustainability, being advantageous in precision-focused research (for example, clinical trials or epidemiological research). Conversely, indices based on binary scoring offer a simplified perspective, serving as valuable tools for surveys, observational studies, and public health. Recognizing their strengths and limitations is crucial for a comprehensive assessment of diets and their implications.
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.