ArticleNutrition journal2026
Development and application of a healthy plant content estimation algorithm for Australian packaged foods.
Article in Nutrition journal, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundHigh intakes of red and processed meat, trans fats, sodium and low intakes of fibre and minimally processed plant foods such as wholegrains, fruits, nuts, seeds, and vegetables are major dietary risk factors for the development of non-communicable diseases. Despite the acknowledged health and environmental benefits of many plant foods, consumers lack accessible tools to identify the healthy plant content of packaged foods. This study aimed to develop an algorithm for predicting levels of healthy plant content of packaged foods (namely fruit, vegetables, legumes, whole-grains, nuts and seeds, while excluding oils, ultra-processed ingredients, and plant ingredients with high levels of sugar, such as dried fruit, fruit and vegetable juices, pastes, purees and gels) and to apply this algorithm to the Australian packaged food supply.
methodsA five-step method of estimating plant content was developed and applied to 19,269 packaged foods in the 2022 Australian FoodSwitch database. This database contains nutrition composition data for products available in-store across major supermarkets in Australia. The mean (SD) plant content was calculated for different food categories within the food supply and across each of the plant components.
resultsIn total, 1154 unique ingredients were identified in the packaged food sample, 38.4% of which contained healthy plant content. The mean weight of healthy plant content was 24.6 g/100 g (range 0–100 g/100 g). This was mostly driven by vegetable content (10.0 g/100 g, 40.7% of the total weight), followed by nuts/seeds (5.2 g/100 g, 21.1%), whole-grains (3.9 g/100 g, 15.9%), fruit (3.1 g/100 g, 12.6%) and legumes (2.4 g/100 g, 9.8%). Categories with the highest mean healthy plant content included ‘fruits, vegetables, nuts, and legumes’ (66.7 (34.1)g/100 g), ‘snack foods’ (43.4 (29.5)g/100 g), and ‘sauces, dressings, spreads, and dips’ (36.0 (34.3)g/100 g). There was wide variation in the healthy plant content within food categories (e.g., 0.0 g to 78.4 g/100 g for ‘cereal and grain products’).
conclusionsThe healthy plant content of packaged food in Australia varies substantially between and within product categories. This suggests the potential utility of this algorithm for providing consumers with key information to make healthier and more sustainable food choices.
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.