ArticleInternational journal of obesity (2005)2026
The impact of calorific screening thresholds and weight status when validating UK supermarket transaction records in dietary evaluation: FIO-STRIDE.
Article in International journal of obesity (2005), 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSupermarket transaction data has the potential to provide a wide-scale understanding of population dietary behaviours, but its relationship with consumption is unclear as purchases are typically made at the household level while consumption occurs at the individual level. These behaviours may differ by weight status. This study assessed whether calorific screening thresholds improved the agreement between objective consumer purchase data and self-reported dietary intake for people living with (PLWOw/Ob
methodsParticipants (N = 642) from a retailer's loyalty card database completed a 170-item food frequency questionnaire, shared transaction records, height, weight, and household composition data for this study. Nutrients (energy, sugar, total fat, saturated fat, protein, and sodium) from supermarket transaction purchases were allocated to the study individual proportionally based on their household composition. Bland-Altman analyses were used to assess the agreement and bias between objective consumer purchase data and self-reported dietary intake globally, and between PLWOw/Ob
resultsNo agreement was identified between objective consumer purchase data and self-reported dietary intake for any of the nutrients when the data were analysed without screening thresholds. However, agreement was identified when screening thresholds were employed at ≥1000 Kcal/day (energy, sugar, total fat and saturated fat) or ≥1500 Kcal/day (protein and sodium). PLWOw/Ob
conclusionsThe application of screening thresholds based on estimated individual calories purchased may provide a valuable preprocessing step within the analysis of consumer purchase data, allowing agreement to be achieved for absolute nutrient values. Differences in bias between PLWOw/Ob
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.