Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41243729›Full record

ArticleJournal of human nutrition and dietetics : the official journal of the British Dietetic Association2025

Development and Validation of a New Tool for Assessing the Intake of Ultra-Processed Foods in Adult Population: GR-UPFAST.

Alexandra Foscolou, Evgenia Kousta, Katerina Trikalioti, Konstantina Liva, Giannoula Nikolaou, Georgios I Panoutsopoulos, Maria Dimitriou, Andriana C Kaliora, Aristea Gioxari

Abstract readValidation Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of human nutrition and dietetics : the official journal of the British Dietetic Association, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Development and Validation of a New Tool for Assessing the Intake of Ultra-Processed Foods in Adult Population: GR-UPFAST.Journal of human nutrition and dietetics : the official journal of the British Dietetic Association · 2025
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Alexandra FoscolouDepartment of Nutritional Science and Dietetics, School of Health Sciences, University of the Peloponnese, Antikalamos, Kalamata, Greece.
Evgenia KoustaDepartment of Nutritional Science and Dietetics, School of Health Sciences, University of the Peloponnese, Antikalamos, Kalamata, Greece.
Katerina TrikaliotiDepartment of Nutritional Science and Dietetics, School of Health Sciences, University of the Peloponnese, Antikalamos, Kalamata, Greece.
Konstantina LivaDepartment of Nutritional Science and Dietetics, School of Health Sciences, University of the Peloponnese, Antikalamos, Kalamata, Greece.
Giannoula NikolaouDepartment of Nutritional Science and Dietetics, School of Health Sciences, University of the Peloponnese, Antikalamos, Kalamata, Greece.
Georgios I PanoutsopoulosDepartment of Nutritional Science and Dietetics, School of Health Sciences, University of the Peloponnese, Antikalamos, Kalamata, Greece.
Maria DimitriouDepartment of Nutritional Science and Dietetics, School of Health Sciences, University of the Peloponnese, Antikalamos, Kalamata, Greece.
Andriana C KalioraDepartment of Nutrition and Dietetics, School of Health Science and Education, Harokopio University, Athens, Greece.ORCID 0000-0003-3843-7331
Aristea GioxariDepartment of Nutritional Science and Dietetics, School of Health Sciences, University of the Peloponnese, Antikalamos, Kalamata, Greece.ORCID 0000-0002-4869-6815

Funding

The authors received no specific funding for this work.
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

aimsOne of the most widely used classification systems for ultra-processed foods is NOVA. However, it lacks adaptability to the Greek dietary context and market. Thus, the aim was to develop a valid and easy-to-use tool, friendly to health professionals, which, in combination with the existing nutritional assessment tools, will be able to determine the level of UPF consumption and dietary habits of young Greek adults.

methodsFor the GR-UPFAST (GReek Ultra Processed Food intake ASsessment Tool) design, a multi-station procedure was followed; literature review, field visits in food markets, classification, and definition of food types and portions. Four experienced nutritionists conducted content and face validity. Then, a cross-sectional study in 220 young adults, aged 18-30, both males and females was performed. Internal consistency of the GR-UPFAST was assessed using Cronbach's alpha. Criterion and predictive validity were evaluated through Spearman's correlations with MedDietScore and body weight. Construct validity was assessed with confirmatory factor analysis.

resultsTotal Cronbach's α value was 0.766. Cronbach's α values if an item deleted ranged from 0.720 to 0.770, indicating overall good and stable internal consistency. Confirmatory factor analysis confirmed the one-dimension GR-UPFAST's structure, and the very good model fit (x

conclusionsGR-UPFAST appears to be a practical and valid tool for assessing UPF consumption among Greek younger adults. It may enhance comprehension of nutrition in younger adults and probably in other Greek and Mediterranean populations.

Indexed as

DietDiet SurveysFast FoodsNutrition AssessmentAdolescentAdultCross-Sectional StudiesFeeding BehaviorFemaleFood, ProcessedGreeceHumansMaleReproducibility of ResultsYoung Adultbody weightGreek populationGR‐UPFASTMediterranean dietnew dietary assessment toolultra‐processed foodsUPF

Identifiers

PMID41243729
PMCPMC12621074

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.