Categorising ultra-processed foods in large-scale cohort studies: evidence from the Nurses' Health Studies, the Health Professionals Follow-up Study, and the Growing Up Today Study. (16th September 2021)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Khandpur, Neha; Rossato, Sinara; Drouin-Chartier, Jean-Philippe; Du, Mengxi; Steele, Euridice M.; Sampson, Laura; Monteiro, Carlos; Zhang, Fang F.; Willett, Walter; Fung, Teresa T.; Sun, Qi
• Is Part Of: Journal of nutritional science. Volume 10(2021)
• Publication Date: 2021-09-16
• Subjects: Cohort studies -- Diet categorisation -- Expert discussion -- Food frequency questionnaires -- Nova groups -- Ultra-processed foods; Nutrition -- Periodicals; 612.305
• DOI: 10.1017/jns.2021.72
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2048-6790

Abstract

Abstract: This manuscript details the strategy employed for categorising food items based on their processing levels into the four NOVA groups. Semi-quantitative food frequency questionnaires (FFQs) from the Nurses' Health Studies (NHS) I and II, the Health Professionals Follow-up Study (HPFS) and the Growing Up Today Studies (GUTS) I and II cohorts were used. The four-stage approach included: (i) the creation of a complete food list from the FFQs; (ii) assignment of food items to a NOVA group by three researchers; (iii) checking for consensus in categorisation and shortlisting discordant food items; (iv) discussions with experts and use of additional resources (research dieticians, cohort-specific documents, online grocery store scans) to guide the final categorisation of the short-listed items. At stage 1, 205 and 315 food items were compiled from the NHS and HPFS, and the GUTS FFQs, respectively. Over 70 % of food items from all cohorts were assigned to a NOVA group after stage 2. The remainder were shortlisted for further discussion (stage 3). After two rounds of reviews at stage 4, 95⋅6 % of food items (NHS + HPFS) and 90⋅7 % items (GUTS) were categorised. The remaining products were assigned to a non-ultra-processed food group (primary categorisation) and flagged for sensitivity analyses at which point they would be categorised as ultra-processed. Of all items in the food lists, 36⋅1 % in the NHS and HPFS cohorts and 43⋅5 % in the GUTS cohorts were identified as ultra-processed. Future work is needed to validate this approach. Documentation and discussions of alternative approaches for categorisation are encouraged.